##VIDEO ID:15uCuTWW5TI## e e e e e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] no test okay I'd like to uh go ahead and get started if everybody's okay with that I'd like to go ahead and call the Mee progress I'd like to ask everybody to please silence their phones and beepers if they have any good evening this board is comprised of seven members four members of the board shall constitute a quorum and the affirmative vote of four members shall be necessary for the adoption of any motion if only four members of the board are present an applicant May request and be entitled to a continuance to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the board if a matter is continued due to a lack of Quorum the chairperson or Secretary of the board May set a special meeting to consider such matter in the event that four votes are not obtained an applicant except in the case of a comprehensive plan Amendment May request a continuance or Advance the application to proceed to the city commission without a recommendation pursuant to resolution number 202-1184 the City of Coral Gables has returned to traditional inperson meetings however the Planning and Zoning Board has established the ability for the public to provide comments virtually for those members of the public who are appearing on Zoom um and which to testify actually you do not have to be uh since it is not it's a legislative you do not have to be visible and be sworn in uh lobbyist registration and disclosure any person who acts as a lobbyist must register with the city clerk as required pursuant to the city code as chair I now officially call the city of corl Gables Planning and Zoning Board special meeting on Mediterranean standards of September 26 2024 to order the time is 402 Joe if you please call the role Robert bear here Julio G ask to be excused zalinski here Felix Paro here havean also requested to be excused chip Withers here ABS instead here we will not have swearing in today as the item is uh legislative as I had stated before everyone who speaks today must complete the roster on the podium we ask that you print your name clearly so the official records of your name and address will be correct Zoom platform participants I will ask any person wishing to speak on tonight's agenda or this afternoon's agenda item to please open your chat and send a direct message to Jill Menendez stating you would like to speak before the board and include your full name Jill will call you when it's your turn I ask you to be concise for the interested time phone platform participants will then follow after Zoom participants are done I will ask phone participants to comment on tonight's agenda item as well and I ask you to be concise for the interested time procedure we'll use tonight is first the identification of agenda item by Mr caller actually it'll be Madam City attorney Mr caller is not here presentation uh by staff and a uh I'll go ahead and open it for public comment first in Chambers then in uh the zoom platform and phone line platform I'll go ahead and close public comment we'll have board discussion uh then if there's a motion discussion and second of a motion if applicable board's final comments and a vote um before we start um in light of not having a full board on this item which is uh such an important issue I would like the board's input on a few options one we can go ahead defer to reschedule the meeting two we can proceed with the meeting and see if there is a recommendation and a vote and three we can proceed with the meeting and defer a recommendation and vote uh absent board members will then have the ability to read the transcripts and we can continue at a lad meeting Mr sherper we also have another issue because we have one of the board members who's going to be correct departing at 5:30 you say no so we may not at 1 2 3 4 I don't know if that's really a uh appropriate for such an important matter andan I'm willing I'm I want to start because we need to to start we may have to get when we get to that point we may have to reconsider if we continue or right yes Felix Mr chairman uh I would suggest number three and even with presid company uh leaving prematurely although we would not have the Quorum we would lose the Quorum at that time the Quorum would be lost for a vote the discussion can continue and we would be able to provide the verbatim minutes to all three members at that time depending on how far along we get in the hour and a half that we have before the 5:30 uh time and and you know we we can then uh have that to be able to conclude the discussion and vote with hopefully all the members present at the next planning board meeting Christina let me ask you a question please since we have advertised as a planning and zoning board meeting with which is quasi judicial even though this item is legislative do we need to because of sunshine laws if we lose the Quorum are we allowed to continue so you would not lose the Quorum you would still have four members if I'm not mistaken right we would not lose a quorum he leaves at 530 once he leaves at 5:30 we'll have 1 2 3 four we have the quum then we can continue okay so so it's a matter of and and just to answer for the sake of discussion if if you lost the quum you can continue discussion you just could not take any action right okay and and the verbatim minutes could be made available to all the board members or they could they could watch a a a tape of the discussion that's an option to to be able to hit the ground running at the next time and and complete it yeah and you could I mean you could also decide at you know when you lose when when Mr Withers has to leave you could decide to maybe conclude this one and then continue it at you know a later meeting it's it's all the options are really available but I think you know Felix your recommendation is probably agree with you can we don't may not take a vote until we get all seven board members presentent exactly you know and I think that would be fair um and and specifically you know I would like to hear the input of you know two architects which to me are correct you know and you took the words out of my mouth right right there's two architects that are missing tonight or this afternoon okay all right if everybody's okay we'll go ahead and continue with this matter at this time is that good you okay with that too absolutely absolutely thank you Madam City attorney could you please uh read into the record yes agenda item E1 is an ordinance of the city Commission of Coral Gables Florida providing for text amendments to the city of cor Gables official zoning code Article 5 architecture section 5-200 Mediterranean standards article 3 uses section 3-42 restrictions related to location and article 16 definitions to enhance the quality of pobles Mediterranean Design By requiring a conceptual design review removing duplicative criteria relocating inapplicable standards supplementing existing criteria and including additional Mediterranean building examples providing for severability repeater codification and providing for an effective date so good afternoon Cher Garcia um plent official and so the memo today um actually is just capturing what was discussed at the last meeting um two weeks ago um the the red lines that are in here should look familiar they were on your draft from last September meeting that from two ago and the ones in purple are the ones that incorpor from last last time discussion right so um some of the comments are from Alex Adams a member of the public who came and had some comments umal comments for the board to consider um there were some clarifications by some of the board members here that are incorporated into this draft in purple so as a safe for to save time I that's all I need to say thank you thank you you do have a PowerPoint of all the right you don't no this was here to discuss and get your feedback because mean I I we said last time I got some comments right that I don't know if then we not going to be able to put it up to go through you know through each of we all have the same draft so we can go Page by page if you wish to that way okay um before we proceed Jennifer I mean sorry Joe do yes do we have anybody that has signed up to speak uh no one has indicated they wish to speak okay nobody in Zoom or phone platform either I'll send them a message but no okay at this time uh I'd like to go ahead and close it for public comment chip would you like to start us off um no I mean I I don't I'm not quite sure I totally understand I thought we were going to go Point by point and discuss them as we we went through now that we had also mentioned some people had some red lines to share with the board I we can again go Page by page if you want to do it that way well I know I know Felix wanted to go Page by Page item by item is what he had say I think I think if we went through it it might be easier if we go through it go through mine and then agreed I mean I don't know how you guys feel about that right I agre don't you yeah and I think what Robert uh was was uh intending by having it up there is that uh then it's easy to go from one to everybody's looking at it and also anybody that's home watching this you know will understand where we are you know where where it would be the same thing as this except Page by Page or going through it right so we had in the past for every single meeting would you be able to bring it up or or I can find it an email to um but we can go ahead and continue while they're looking for it fix you want to get us going sure I'll take a step at so um on the uh on the memorandum uh from from staff uh before you get into the thing it there there were a few questions that I had um uh th this was uh the best you know staff what they're trying to do is recapture uh the previous meeting before this particular meeting and I think that when you look at that one of the things is some of the criteria this is the second paragraph of the first page um and it says some of the criteria was revised or removed such as porch balcony depths and insisted to keep other proposed criteria such as window design standards and Hab habitable liner requir ments if you recall that was where we we really got to page one uh where we were talking about the depth which is not you know it's not shown anywhere like the city of Miami does you know which is uh the depth of the the liners um and it just so happens that that particular evening we had looked at a project that we had recommended approval for that hasn't gone to the commission yet and uh and they they had hidden the parking areas which that was the disc discussion with that um we don't we still don't have you know a minimum depth uh on this but that's that's something that is uh shown here that's something that should be discussed at some point trying to establish a minimum depth of the liner uh that would go in front of the U um uh the parking areas uh in inside the uh mix use buildings the second thing is that um there I I thought that it was uh a little uh unfortunate the way that it was written number five on the first page which was Pro uh prohibited horizontal and vertical sliding windows and doors of the buildings I think it's almost like a runon sentence uh what we started to discuss was uh keeping the the windows and and and doors you know separate so you have either a horizontal or or or B um um vertical uh opening and closing um fenestration and there was a discussion uh that we had where uh we had a difference of opinion of whether you could see or not see we discussed also in detail um the uh Juliet one um the Juliet balconies uh whether they could be done one way or the other I know we have uh the city architect here and one of the board members from the board of Architects here today uh and I know that they have in the past uh disced discuss the Juliet balconies and how to do it in such a way that it looks uh symmetrical and it's on the same plane uh one of the discussions that we had specifically was you know whether when when you're looking at the the fenestration on these uh especially tall buildings where you have these sliding doors where there's a a difference uh between the two it makes it look different and uh we also discussed specifically that uh some of the buildings have have been built although the board of arch were were blamed for them uh they actually got changed during the shop drawing process and they were switched and never went back to the board of Architects and they were administra reviewed by by someone other than a member of the board of Architects or the city architect at that time um the general uh generalizing uh the option number seven as an option for the first uh three to four stories to be activated with habitable space and consistent with high quality materials I think high quality materials should be used throughout the buildings um I I see that certain developers in this city um uh really go all out to use quality materials and I don't think it should be limited to three or four stories I think you could you could see that all the way uh through and um I I I think that if you're th this is a bonus that is being provided to to not only give great architecture but also great materials that are long lasting and I don't think that there should be a limit to just the first three or four stories and and U I understand that some of the elements that you might be able to uh look at uh you should be able to look at them but make sure that the quality of the materials throughout look good and uh we see other examples of Mediterranean uh inspired uh design and uh they use poor materials and you could see it whether it's on the 2nd 3rd fourth or 5ifth 6th 7th 8th uh story so that's that's the only uh other comment I have Felix but let me ask you because we talked about it briefly and and and I don't know where you're reading from because I I'm sorry the memorandum the first page oh that the previous one not not the current one the original one no I'm I'm you're reading from the original from the original one because that's that's where we started the the conversation and and these these again these are not necessarily Provisions that are in the code itself this was what staff captured from our previous conversations and that's what that fromont page Jennifer you've updated those in what you sent us now yes okay this is the latest because so that's what we have confusing but yes because I think that's confusing I'd rather if we can read from what has been updated okay I'll read from what's updated but what's updated is some of these things are omitted and and that's why I didn't feel comfortable with that in other words because the liner the liner is one example that is on in second third and fourth all the levels correct but we also talked about it which I'm I'm I'm in favor but we're feasible right correct and and if you recall we discuss you you and I both discussed that we're feasible which which should be in there and again one of the issues here is that this really is not part of the med bonus it's it's really part of of you know more of the the zoning uh code itself not necessarily the med bonuses but when you're using the liners having a prescriptive way of saying you're going to have a minimum of 20 ft is I think what we were disc we feasible and for example Glen Pratt's project that came before us particular evening um he was able to do it where it was feasible not all the way around and he had a very difficult site it was not only triangular but it was also um it it had uh Street facing all the way around so that became very difficult for him there but you know we we looked at it for what it was so the the last comment that I don't I don't uh see here uh from the previous one and if you could indulge me it's the last comment Mr CH uh it says uh Incorporated an optional requirement to to provide the additional open space and reduce the amount to pay to the 0.25 staff started to address that comment at the last meeting I still don't understand it I'm not that smart but I'd like to be able to understand where the point 25 how it works yeah the open space fund so as you know there is a fund like a CIP fund that the city has that routinely puts money into it for acquisition of a Parks right open space in our city right so part are they optional remember these are 12 options that they can do six of the 12 if it's multif family or eight of the 12 that's mixed use they could have that option maybe it's a small site they can't provide a lot of open space so they could pay into a fund that would eventually have open space available by the city in the area all right and Mr chairman I I want the board members to remember that comment and the reason I want them to remember the comment is because um there's also a sustainability bonus in in the in the med bonuses there and for me I think that you know the sustainability should be a requirement not a bonus for Mediterranean style architecture you know and putting money into a park fund should not be one of the again we're getting into the check off uh we're going to check this off off one thing has nothing to do with with the Mediterranean style has nothing to do with it and it should not be there if you want to give if if someone can't meet their Green Space I I I think we have a different conversation has nothing to do with the bonuses I just want to either a take it off the table or discuss it during you know when when we're looking at the required items you know to be able to achieve that bonus so uh uh Mr chairman those are all the comments I had on on the transmittal the original transmittal that was there and I know that staff has floated the 20 foot habitable liner you know I don't have an issue with that uh but but some of these things I think we can't lose focus that we're giving people a bonus and bonuses all bonuses are discretionary so because they're discretionary we can ask for these things but for the style and to give the board of Architects and the city architect the ability to provide um more power to be able to achieve architecturally what we're asking them to achieve in in return for a bonus I think is important okay okay thank you s uh well I certainly don't have that level of uh of detail to talk about uh but uh I agree with Felix when it it was like the if you provide a bike rack you know in the old in the old I mean I I mean we can't be arbitrary and throw a bike rack in and that's part of your requirement I I totally agree putting money into a fund um should just be part of the zoning code if they don't have enough space for Green Space not part not a requirement uh that they get by for Mediterranean bonus yeah just to clarify that that wasn't to get out of a requirement for Green Space it was just an addition to any green space that they have on site that's required of them 25% for multif family and 10% for mixed use this would be an addition to that just to clarify right right but that's an arbitrary thing it has nothing to do with a med what what the building looks like yeah you know to me the requirements are does it look Mediterranean okay that's all I have to say thank you I I have several questions and and some of them is going to be for our City attorney for example in the context analysis um and that has been modified and and I had had some conversation with Jennifer regarding this one particular I'm sorry Robert what page are you on uh five page five of the development bonus standards number one which is context analysis so if you so we can have that pulled up on the screen I think sheill has that ready the first one and and my question is because we talked about it if contextually is in the surrounding the existing condition but you may be in in a MX2 zoning and you have one-story buildings to me I want to make sure that the context analysis is based on not only what's there but what the future development potential is based on the zoning and I want to make sure that the language is provided assures that you could do that because if if your Zone you know to be able to do a 77t building and you only have one story building next to you today doesn't mean that the uses and the the the the uh the the zoning allows you to do that you know otherwise you're going to you're going to prohibit that landowner doing what the zoning allows all right now's the intent of having uh compatible with the existing and planned context and the Planned context refers to the zoning right yes okay uh V map yes I would just like to add my opinion when Robert is is done with this particular Point see so I want to make sure that it it it does states that you also have to consider the existing zoning that is in that for that particular site can I ask a question regarding this context you know I'm all for the context and compatibility features but what what if you have an area in the city that is has glass buildings I mean nothing Mediterranean at all and a project comes in that's Mediterranean and they're asking for bonuses how does that fit into that how does a Mediterranean now because I think that the board of Architects will have the the authority to approve or not approve the project that that is too specific and I think the board my concern is that you have zoning that you know it's mx1 and you have existing one story two sted building and you're going to come in with a building that's going to be taller are you then not because you're not contextually compatible with the existing building you're not allowed to do what the zoning allows wouldn't that be picked up in the initial conceptual review doesn't that the first step is the conceptual review before it goes to the board of Architects would that not be discussed at that point yes but not this actual criteria right this Criterion will be discussed at the med bonus okay public meeting and I I want to make sure look I'm I'm all for the comparability but you cannot take away the zoning and says well you're Zone forx but because you got a one-story building next to you you won't be able to do that right again the intent is existing in planned um planned uh context of the area Okay I I just want to make sure we clarify it's within one block just want to make sure that you know if that was the intent it sounds like it's it's been you know Incorporated in here with that intent yeah because when I I consulted two you know land youth attorney that come here and and they were not would like you're saying that there's a concern that it should be more explicit yes there there are different ways of uh resolving these issues one of them first of all when the board of Architects and the when the board of Architects uh reviews their plans they're reviewing it according to section 5102 which is the design review standards forget about the bonuses M first it's the review standards and in there specifically it says architectural compatibility with the neighboring properties and uses as far as the context is concerned the zoning as you say in this particular example of 77 ft and let's say you're near or across a Waterway or you're across um a public rideway and you have two story single family residential you know how do you how do you work out the compatibility issue there cuz I you said mx1 but what if it's single family res no no that's a different I I I I just family I I will concur with you I okay that that's thinkle family but if you have and I don't know if if if you know if you have an mx1 and you got existing one twostory building next to you and then you're going to come in with a right what one of the things that I find um excruciating when I see some of the developments that have been built is that we'll have a u you know an eight-story building next to right across the street from single family so I find that wrong but the other way contextually is that you have the ability from massing that the board of Architects has the responsibility to look at massing and you have the ability of stepping down not taking the rights away the the zoning rights away and I just want to make sure that everybody understands there's a difference between the design review standards that the board of Architects has to make sure that they review as part of their charge and then the second thing is the discretionary bonuses so we're talking about two different things if you're allowed four floors but with the bonuses you're allowed six floors when you're looking at the massing of the building you on the board of Architects have the ability to say well wait a minute you have to step back those two floors so at least you amarate the particular issue of the compatibility and the contextual it would be obviously wrong to take away the right and illegal to take away the right but the board of Architects has the ability to to say well wait a minute how can we make it more you want to make it simpler for them to do the interpretation you don't want it to be you know questionable you want to make sure that when they look at it it says you know based on this they're compatible and that's my point for for the board to have to facilitate the process for them I I will tell you that um I respectfully disagree with what has been built recently in the last 10 15 years in this city why because thank God that the zoning code on theun road said that for the first you know 100 ft can't remember 100 150t 100t 45t right 45t maximum gee why did they put that in because across the street on the Jun Road they're duplexes but when you have that building behind it stepping down that makes the compatibility and the contextual component of I don't think that's argument here I agree 100% right but there but if you tie the board of Architects hands if you tie the board of Architects hands and you don't allow them to suggest the massing component of it why we have a we're not saying to tie the hand on the contrary we're trying to make it you know I think clear for them to make that so that it's not arbitrary yes I mean I you know and I I think that the compatibility is is one that you're going to have and nothing has to do with single family because you know if if you have a a two-story single family in front you know you have more options this has this is more and look at the example say mx1 or or something to that and you you may have an area for example I'm going use the the the uh the district The Design District by The Collection you now it's all built or pretty much but you had a zoning that allows you to do up to back then up to whatever 10 stories 120 ft whatever but you had existing one-story building so if you go by by the wording you know here you got to look at the compa you know what's there in the area you will not give him the board the the the discretion says even though you know you got one story building you could do X Christina let me ask you a question when a project is presented to the board of Architects what is or maybe Gus is better at answering this when a project is presented to the board of Architects what is their responsibility to look at and not look at do they do they go ahead and look at zoning do they look at other items or or do they look at design yes so Mr chair I would I would like Gus to to answer since Gus does from our office when we do um um um service counsel to the board at their meetings when there's big projects or special questions Gus does um service counsil to the board of Architects so I'd like him to give the the guidance that he has um given over the years thanks welcome Gus thank you uh good afternoon chair fellow board members assistant City attorney gusa biles so I I've reviewed the the most recent Planning and Zoning meetings and I think there's a bit bit of confusion as to what the board of Architects really can look at so there is zoning related items meaning up zoning change of comp plan all those things those items are not within the purview of the board now the question of height and massing that is 100% within the purview of the board the best example I gave to the board recently was if a building is allowed 100 ft per code and with Mediterranean bonus they can go to 120 when they review whether a property meets met training bonus you look at the Mediterranean standards you apply that section of the code and a property could check all the boxes and meet the criteria and be a Mediterranean bonus um Mediterranean style building and meet the criteria for level one and level two bonuses so now that building that was 100 ft now can be 120 ft but then when the design review of the building happens which is the second step because typically the board will grant the bonus first and then review the design at that moment the board could make a determination that because of the massing and the context that an 80ft building is appropriate even though in this particular situation they could do 100 ft or 120 ft because of the surrounding neighborhood because of the context that they believe that the appropriate building here is 80 ft now it's it's a little confusing at times because you're looking at the same similar issue but under two different lenses so you cannot be looking at it in the lens of zoning and determining whether there's appropriate sewer or RightWay improvements those are items that are handled elsewhere they're not for the aesthetic review board but if aesthetically because of the compatibility of the context and the massing a particular building shouldn't be 120 ft in this a maybe if it gets set back maybe a portion gets pushed back and the massing of it changes that is all within the purview of the board so how often does that happen where the board says you know not 120 but 80 is better how often does that happen I can't speak to that I'm not at every meeting but I don't think it happens often Mr saos I have a question sure I don't see anywhere where it says Aesthetics it says the review design review standards nowhere does it say Aesthetics what I mean Aesthetics you meant design I mean Des I'm sorry the reason I'm saying that is because that minimizes what the board of Architects does when you're talking about massing as you just said those are not Aesthetics we're we're talking about design review standards the massing how you set back I mean for me I would want to make sure that from a massing standpoint for example there's a great example which I will not name the project right now it is it is a very tall project it is on a street and they have all the massing right on the edge of this street me I mean I would have said you still can have your square footage but you should push the massing back and that's what the board of archtics can do and and that's part of the design review standards which are on these two simple Pages says it specifically building scale and mass building facade step backs I mean what what I would do the city architect I I would give this to every board member to make sure they know that they have that ability to do that you know because if they subjectively say I'm going to reduce your allowed height you know that is given from a zoning standpoint so let's be clear I would never Tak you can't you cannot say that that there's a difference there's a difference in saying you have a zoning that you can build up to 100 square feet 100 ft but I don't think it's appropriate it needs to be 90 that's a problem that is Harris now if you can articulate that because the design review standards the compatibility in the massing this particular ular building is not appropriate for the neighborhood for the abing properties at this particular height the massing should be revised so that this 100t area be reduced to 70 80 whatever that may be and move around the design of the building that is 100% permissible I see how I'm saying the same thing but in two different ways right I I I and I I try to make that distinction to the board I've I've probably presented this before the board maybe five times at least um but there there's a there's a distinction to be made I don't disagree with what you said said the only thing I objected to was the word aesthetic that's my apologies I I meant design review stand I'm just saying it's not aesthetic what they have to do is very important and from a contextual standpoint there's absolutely no doubt and I think you could have it both ways as long as the board of Architects understands what they can and cannot do and it has to be crystal clear but the massing is one of the largest tools that they have in their tool tool chest to make it compatible and make us a different and a nicer Place agreed okay any other questions for me I think we're good you know I I still have a question that I hasn't been answered because we're talking about compat architectural compatibility if a project comes in on a piece of property where it's surrounded by glass buildings is that compatible with that Mediterranean project be compatible with a sea of glass buildings that would be in the CBD area which would be the only place where you can and know it will be compatible but then you're not going to get the bonuses that you're seeking the answer the quick answer that would be up to the board of Architects they would make the determination if it was compatible or not on a Case by casee basis on a Case by case basis each individual building individual project comes in and since you're on the subject to be very specific the Alan Morris iconic building on Hambra on on the Alan moris project in alambra which is on a very acute angle it was surrounded by very you know BR brutalistic architecture and they chose to do something which is Iconic today and and use the quality of materials and the massing and everything else and and basically that was along the lines of the Mediterranean bonus and sometimes you're actually providing that and from you have contextual which you normally would look at but you have to be careful because the reason that you're Pro providing this discretionary bonus is specifically to be able to promote a spe a specific style and in order to have that style to get those discretionary bonuses there that's where you try to uh turn the corner and make the exception so I think that when you're promoting Mediterranean bonuses for Mediterranean architecture it's very specific you would not be providing Mediterranean bonuses for another glass building or another brutalistic concrete building no I understand that but I'm just saying it becomes then subjective EXA you have a sea of so aren't we supposed to get very specific here about how to navigate Mediterranean bonuses the the problem is that that the first subject that was brought up which was the the contextual uh uh study is the most broad of them uh as you proceed through the sections you're going to have much more specific type of of you know constraints so the the biggest one is on the contextual which which Robert brought up is what happens when I have this type of zoning you know am am I going to be um am am I going to suffer because I'm next to something that isn't necessarily going to meet the scale requirement when I set it up right next to it yeah and I understand the scale and all that but that's not what I'm talking about we were talking about architectural compatibility so for a novice if I have a glass building and there's a project coming in that's wants to be a med bonus building and it says it has to be compatible according to this if I was on the board of Architects I'd say well it's not compatible no you don't get the bonus I I just want to make sure there's Clarity on this the reason that the med bonuses were first brought up was because all of the buildings in the CBD area were glass buildings or brutalistic architecture and then the bonuses came in once a specific building was built 40 years ago and that specific building became the template for other people to start building that particular style because they wanted to achieve the bonuses achieve a specific look and the other buildings which were there 40 years ago are still there and and and but you do see more of an influence because there are very few more of those glass buildings that were built from 40 years forward no I understand why this came to be I'm just saying that we're getting very specific on what needs to be required to get the med bonus and then we're saying yeah but regarding that architectural compatibility it's up to no not not necessarily it's contextual contextually very different than style or yeah or design yes it's it's you know design is is I think design is going to be very restrictive of what you're going to be able to do contextually more of a scale right it's more of a massing comp a massing tool than than detail architectural tool that that's the difference I get where where Robert's coming from and you that's not what I'm talking I'm not talking about massing I'm talking about look I'm talking about architectural compatibility isn't that the look so in each case the board of Architects would review the particular design that's being presented and in that particular case would apply the criteria would and make that determination in each particular case there's not one size fits all it's in each particular case they would make the determination it's not subjective it's based on the criteria and in the on the standards well so it it doesn't have to be architecturally compatible is it what you're saying so I'm not necessarily because it doesn't have to be the same design right I don't want to yeah it doesn't have to be the board have the authority to say you know that's a glass building we're not going to give you the bonus and this you know it it it has look I'm saying that they shouldn't build Med a med style building next to a glass uh glass structure but should they get the med bonus well but well I I think you're talking more about should they build a taller building I think your concern is if you're talking about the med bonus to me you're you're talking about adding more F or more height I think I think what Robert or what's being said is compatibility between a design if it's a glass structure next to a Mediterranean building I I'm not talking about massing I'm not talking about additional height I'm talking about the look you're nodding I think you know what I'm I'm getting it I don't care if there's a I don't know if I have the answer yet Peter kigian I said on the board of Architects I'm here state your name and address pet kigian uh 1330 Northwest uh 84th Avenue PPKs offices I said on the board I'm here today I'm the co-chair Judy is the chair she's not here today I don't know if have the answer for you but the way that I see it the entire city is a Mediterranean based City so in the larger context any Mediterranean uh building is contextual in the city the ones that are glass boxes are not contextual so it would not be inappropriate to have a Mediterranean building in an area where there's brutalist or glass boxes I don't know if that helps you say it would not be it would not be no it would not be appropriate to give a Mediterranean bonus to a a non-med building that's you know in in the but but okay just to clear because if you're going to have let's say next on a Hambra where is the most example of the glass building the brutalist if you come in the Alam Morris which is a a a good example of met that building even though it's in contextually in that area would get the bonuses yes that's yes what I'm saying is that and and take it a step further the context can be further out than just a block when you're when you're speaking of such large buildings so well not according to this it's a a block according well and and I think immediate contact but so the point is and and I think that examples on a Hambra you got and you know some glass buildings and you got some brutal building and then you got a beautiful Metro Building that today will also get the same bonuses these bonuses yeah so it could be adjacent you know to a glass building but if contextually it's appropriate I think that's it's contextually within the city because we are a Mediterranean based City yeah if I could so we're talking about the the proposed building massing shall be compatible with the existing and planned context period analysis is within a block that's the immediate context so the one block is not your context you're going to be compatible with the existing imp plan existing plan is for the entire city and as we know our plan um architectural style we went to go with based on George amer's in immediate inial Vision was Mediteranean why even have this in in there about architectural compatibility if the whole city is Mediterranean and it's a given why even consider that because there's different because context is both language massing proportional so it's more than just I I understand your point and it's a good it's a good point right if we're next to glass building but there are other things there's building typology there's uh massing there's uh proportions things like that so it's not just one aspect of of the building in several aspects and I and um Juan rco City architect um I I think that's part of the the value that we add to cities is is is also the distinction in building types and typologies and styles and looks I I don't think we we understand that that this city is based on the Mediterranean Ian style and that's that's our core standard and and I think we want that but I think there's also viability to differences and and and buildings that like the glass structures that are time dat buildings that were built in the 80s or the 70s whenever they came about the brutalist style was also a a a period building that there was prevalent at that time and there was built and it's a Tim stamp of that particular era and and I think that's part of of the beauty of the City that that there is viability in versatility that things that are different are good that it's not all the same cookie cutter style that that I think that would be something that would be derogatory to a certain extent coming from a profession where creativity and by the way I'm not I'm not saying don't bu don't build Mediterranean next to a glass building that's not what I'm saying okay I'm saying should that Mediterranean project get the bonus if it's not compatible with the glass buildings and the brutalist buildings all around it well you got to look at each case and and the building that is been proposed you know I I have a I think a good example which I think the architect will agree uh the lumire building lumire building is a classic building by Ronnie Mel very small building there right on pond it's Contex directly across the street unfortunately Julio isn't here but when he designed the colonade building which is Mediterranean and it saved and preserved the original colonade building that is directly across the street if we did it if we go backwards in time when Ronnie Mato came in to the board of Architects and showed them what he was doing with the Lumin air building which was specifically selling types of furniture which are very contemporary very very Cutting Edge type of of of furniture that building really made a statement it has won numerous architectural uh Awards and on top of that it is directly across the street from someone that did take advantage of the bonuses Ronnie Mel's building does did not take advantage of any bonuses because it was never intended to be that way the diversity of of that type of architecture which is really just great architecture I think that's a perfect example you have a bonus to promote Mediterranean correct Bingo yeah and on top of that it was also preserving a historic Jewel and then across the street you have a very low-keyed award-winning contemporary building that I don't find offensive in fact I think is aesthetically incredibly good you know in my op opinion but they didn't ask for a bonus correct now there there had been you know there had been uh mistakes made over the years don't need to name them but for me I think the as you once said the cat is out of the bag you get Med bonus for Med architecture and that was the theme and the problem that we had in the CBD area that that that wasn't being addressed all the time so I I think contextually they can coexist and you could still do another luminary building today if you're not asking for the bonuses correct it's not something we would not say is compatible or contextual I mean that I think look look I've got no issue with what you're saying I'm saying that if that's the case let's just eliminate the architectural compatibility component of this thing because it really doesn't matter in the end no it it does it does it does think very tool very very important tool that the board of Architects absolutely 100% needs why because I think there's components to compatibility I think is the issue compatibility is not just I look like this guy there's compatibility in terms of mass there's compatibility in terms of scale there's compatibility in terms of materiality this say architectural not scale not height it says architectural I I I'll give what is architect I mean maybe I'm I'm misinterpreting architect I'll give you one last it's the look isn't it so I'll give you one last no there's there's components I'm say we need to speak one at a time for the court reporter please sorry okay so let me give you one last example I was just in Boston uh at Boston University they built a technical uh building which is completely out of place I mean I I looked at it immediately the the name that came to me was vomiting drawers you know it looks like it has vomiting drawers contextually it is very misaligned with that area that one block area it would fail miserably but they got it approved they built it the scale is so out of scale and the detailing Etc in my opinion you know the architect I'm sure is a genius but in my opinion it's so out of place that I had to drive around get out of the car and walk through it and look at it to see what the redeeming values were that's my personal opinion but if I were on the board of architex reviewing that building there contextually being a contemporary building not because it's a contemporary building or Mediterranean building or any other style it's just out of scale out of out of place and that's part of what this contextual component is which is a key tool that they need in their toolbox mhm you know look we do have something very close at the uh Douglas metro rail station we got buildings or 36 stories building are there out of contact yes they are you know we we know that you know that's more doesn't matter the style it's you know it's the massing the the proportions of the building you know and I I think I'm I'm not concerned because I think the boore is is will have all the tools necessary to be able to say if it's you know architecturally compatible or not am I not don't you I no I I think the board understands that and is well equipped in that in that regard and and does that on a weekly basis with the projects um you know based on the constraints that we have and the zoning issues and and whatever things are allowed but we're looking at the Aesthetics of the building the mass of the building and and and remember we we we walk a fine line every day between property rights and and design and you look and that's our charge that's our challenge is you know how do we make this better while allowing the applicant to do what they're allowed to do and so we got to be careful and how we how we steer that but that the board is is very well I think my original question is answered when when uh Jennifer S plan surrounding area that means that's take consideration the zoning right well zoning master plan comprehensive plan all those together and I'm sorry I just realized something we've been discussing this I think it's a very good discussion you know very very important this that we're discussing now is a prerequisite in other words you're not getting any bonus for this this is not part of the check so I I'm sorry I I missed it I missed the argument you have a good point but this isn't something that you're checking off to get that bonus this is a prerequisite that you have to go in there and this is one of the things at the very beginning which it wasn't written like this you know a long time ago when they first started doing this I I want well you know I I I have to say and uh thank you for uh Gus wherever Gus went um right behind there Hi Gus over here now for for um letting us know what the board of Architects can do because in the past couple of meetings it was very clear that the it it sounded like the board was being handcuffed in certain areas and I really hope that every member does Now understand that they do have the purview to do what they're supposed to do okay because I know that was F Felix had brought that up initially this has been brought up at a number of meetings and maybe the maybe Gus you need to let them know it for the sixth time that they had this purview cuz obviously viously some people felt uncomfortable on that board going there do you want to continue Robert let me yes my next one is is is one of the comments that we brought up earlier about Juliet Balcony if we prohibit and it's you know on on um I guess uh item number I got on page 13 horizontal or vertical sliding windows and door are prohibited on the exterior of the building facade if you do that then you not you you not be able to do Juliet balconies right because if you have a the intent of a Juliet Balcony that you could open up a a sliding glass door if if you take that away if you won't be able to do a Juliet Balcony I think uh recently the board of Architects allowed a juliia balcony with a certain detail that you requested yeah it was actually a window it was actually a fixed panel at the Juliet Balcony level and a and a and a casement window right so it had a railing oh yes yeah it had the railing height with a fixed window you have a glass p in front of window so you could open it and still get the sensation of the Juliet Balcony sorry one speaker at a time please so the reporter could yeah so again the the window in this particular project had a component that went up to the guard rail height and that was a fixed panel so that's not operable it's solid the railing sits in front of that and then above the railing was a casement window so you can't open the window and the perception of the Julia balcony is still there without the bottom portion of it and that's kind of the concession we made right as a design alternate to the concept of the Juliet Balcony because I think the board in unison feels that sliding doors are not appropriate on a men building and and and that's the reason yeah and I think Judy expressed this same thing uh previously but but the the point is that a Julia balcony as far as the depth is concerned is is basically not quite you know an issue but you aesthetically can still get exactly what you need to get yeah the intent of the Julia balcony is not to step out into it is to open and experience the outdoors from within uh one are you familiar with the vanera project it's now called the standard vanera the one in front of the big Park the curve building yeah yeah yeah yes that has Juliet balconies are you familiar with this project am I what are you familiar with that project yeah yeah I remember the Venera that was like four or five years ago I think yeah doesn't that that that got a med bonus doesn't that have sliding doors probably it may have at that that particular moment that could have been we keep mentioning the poo and how the shop drawings got changed but there are numbers of projects that went through the board of Architects went through planning and zoning SL sliders and they get a med bonus so how do we protect that from actually happening is this going to be I think there's been a progression over the years CU I sat on the board for 11 years and I I experienced the prior Administration and and what the thought process was and now I'm the city architect and and I understand the the push back from the community and the fact that we really want Med buildings and the fact that we're changing the code to align ourselves more with the med bonuses and the med style buildings so there's been a progression over the years and yes have we made mistakes absolutely you know I I think that's that's obvious it's built and and it's happened and but I think we've learned from them and I think we're we're progressing to the point where we're making the buildings better and More in tune with I think what we all want is there is is there something in here that we can prevent a shop drawing from being changed after it goes through the process is there something we can that's already been addressed there there was a a time when the city architect staff did not review shop drawings it only went to building and structural and so now we've made that adjustments now it comes to City architect staff and we all review it and what my staff typically does or if I review it I I typically handle the larger projects personally because they're more complex but my staff is also trained in the fact that you know we get a shop drawing for Windows we got to go back to the boa approved record archive drawings see what's on there if if it's if it's a sliding door on there our hands are tied if the board made the concession or or made the whatever or or missed it or or did it intentionally I'm not sure but you know that's the procedure we have in place today so that issue of somebody approving a shop drawing or changing it should not happen because everything is based on the prior approval that's already in place addition to that number 12 now prohibits those types of Windows and Doors just to be clear Jennifer one of the discussions that we had last time that we were here was the fact of how much space you need in a balcony to go ahead and do a French style door to open up as opposed to a sliding door and I think one of the discussions we also had was if you have a building that's 10 stories high do you really see that well division line and to further that discussion there's also uh Terraces and balconies are inset really deeply a a lot of people are now requiring big Terrace outdoor spaces for outdoor kitchens for families whatever the the the dynamic has changed where now we're getting into larger units four bedrooms five bedrooms larger families living in these multi-story buildings so we've had that discussion internally hey you know the concept of the sliding door the nanad door everybody likes the big openings you know nobody wants a little six foot door open the door and I'm in my Terrace it's it's 30 ft wide and I only have a 6ft opening I want to open up the entire facade to create this indoor outdoor space so we're struggling with it and we're trying to to make uh criteria that would help us you know for example on a deep balcony that's 15 20 ft deep that's really not perceivable from the edge of the building but how do you handle a 12 let's say you've got 12 ft interior how do you handle that door that swing on a 12T door to be able to open up with the space well like I said there's there's now a product called an nador that's a complete opening I don't know if everybody's familiar with that it's a French door a folding door it's a it's a folding door like a bold in a closet but it's a nice French door framed glass it looks just like a French door so that would qualify under the the mediteran that's one of the discussions that that we've had internally we haven't I think finalized that directive yet the the reason is because it's all on the same plane correct when you and then it opens up you know you can have a 20ft wide opening which is beautiful right at a nice 10-story building where you can have a view of the buil more that makes sense to me that makes sense in the discussion we're working with that we again the board is very capable and very on top of new products new strategies dealing with this this issue of the med style and how how can we incorporate modern new techn techology new materiality new products and incorporate into these buildings and still have achieve that look without compromising but the scenario of a of a of a you know a typical sliding door on a med building how do we how do we solve that problem so we we at the board work with this stuff weekly on Project per project and we try to always push the envelope and get these guys The Architects to you know to work on on that concept of hey it's easy to just put a sliding door you know draw it and plop it in the computer and done but how does that sliding door affect the Integrity of the look of the building and that's our our charge you know how does this thing come together at the end well that's good to bring that up should that sort of thing be in here well it's addressing sliders but what about technology where it's on the same plane well and again I think that's something that that happens at the board level on a weekly basis that may or may not make it to the code until 6 months from now a year from now you know cuz we're always getting new products new stuff and we're trying to analyze the the pros and cons and the benefits of the products what you're doing now is in the prerequisite is you're trying to to eliminate the use of a particular product because of the look how it Alters the facade correct and I think also staff may have um said that that you are able to use them as long as they're not seen from the the street level or something like that yeah that that's another discussion but again I'll go back the example of the horizontal sliding windows I think the board has taken a position and a posture on that and said hey you know absolutely we've seen the buildings with the horizontal rolling Windows definitely is not a productive look especially for a med building on a modern building on a modern design contemp design all bets are off it's a no-brainer yeah we can do that we can do fixed storefronts you know we can go on all those Avenues but on a med building that's asking for Med bonus in our opinion right now that's something that we have definitely identified and said hey that's not appropriate what what I'm hearing is that we need to give more discretion to the board of Architects as opposed to being a to defining it specifically know this know this know this well we don't want to be a prescriptive code either we don't want to tie people's hands and say hey do a and that's it we want creativity we want architects to push the envelope to come up with ideas and to impress us and say hey guys this is what we want to do and then let these guys make the final call but we don't want to tie their hands and we don't because then we're going to get redundancy and mediocre work agreed nobody's pushing the envelope careful we got to be real careful on how we handle this cuz we don't want to go down the rabbit hole and get into a dead end and then all of a sudden monotonous stuff that's one thing we don't want I have learned that in 35 years of practice that you don't want to do that yeah it's very hard to cify good organization well you you just mentioned fixed storefront right but the example that you know I'm I brought up here which is the Alan mois new building on um university there the pon par on Pon which is a very nice building I think it went through everybody but that has fixed doorfront I think right fix for Windows in the units or in the building yeah I mean which I think is is great I think what they did they fixed casements well we we push F fixed casements not this at least from from the rendering doesn't look to be fixed case and again Robert that may be on the design of the preliminary but there's also the next tier which is a construction documents which I personally am involved in all those projects and and I I review for that type of stuff I look really carefully at if and if the board approves something that again which by the way I I have no issues whatsoever I think it's it's it's great okay and and by the way you know easily um easily uh my daughter in Chicago lives in a Misan R classic uh skyscraper and it has the storefront front built 70 years ago and it has the storefront and then it has a hopper window down below yeah and that building looks like it was designed yesterday it's it's a classic to say the least so what I'm saying is that I I I agree with the the boa and the prerequisites of saying look you know don't use this whether you want to give them the option of using it around the back side where you can't see it I think that's something that's applicable more to residential work smaller scale and it's a resident and it's not a developer that's building a monster 300,000 building we we we give a little bit more leeway to our residents in regard to Windows for example that that's a great example where we do that you know we are we understand that the casement window is a superior product in terms of the look and the Aesthetics but it's also more expensive and more C and so on a resident level there's a different Dynamic than on a commercial proper so we we do allow that on the residential on the rear side of the houses on The sidey Yards where they're steered from the street we try to work with them because we know that hey there's a big difference between a $50,000 window package and a $25,000 window package and and some residents can't get to that $50,000 level so we you know we negotiate to a certain extent and I think that's fa and reasonable as long as we don't compromise the public realm which is the front of the house right so again we we try really hard to uh to see both sides of the equation but on Commercial products it's different there's a lot more scrutiny it's a lot it's a lot tighter reins on that okay because we understand it's a you know it's a for-profit project and and it's not somebody's personal residence robertt my next comment is uh on uh bonus one level one requirements number two where it says uh any storage of vehicles or off street parking that is above grade should occur behind habital space provided and what I'm saying is you 15 at least in 15 what I'm saying is to add where feasible just to make sure because this is specifically says any storage of vehicles or off street parking must occur behind habital space all I'm saying is we're feasible because you may have a lot that is 100 foot in depth which a lot of the ploted lot in The Gables 100 ft then you will not be able to do the liner the setbacks and get a a garage that if but this is also part of a six or eight out of 12 right so yes it's one that you may not have to check I think that um but but but the example of Glenn's project project that just came in the AL hambur Circle one you know he was he did a great job he he basically had a um a site that was almost yeah that's to Elementary is that right fully fully surrounded by T to do it to do it all the way around I say we're you know I think we're you don't need to check it out but we're feasible you do it and I think he did it where it was feasible for him and and again I think that's at the discretion of the board and and the design and the inherent features of the site the property restriction but have you read the language here it says man mandatory you have to do it this is my point no we're feasible I think should be added yeah this is mandatory all I'm saying is to add we're feasible that gives the the option that Glenn brought in right 100% okay so I I have to ask again so if they move forward with the board of Architects and it's not feasible do they check that off and get a point for that if you add the word when feasible then they're going to have as a one of their criteria that they meet right right if it's not feasible for them they don't check that one off that that's the the reason why we do we do that we don't require all 12 you're only required eight so you can negotiate with with your client your budget your issues and say hey I can do these eight but I can't do that one right if it's not the right property to do what you try to and I agree with the 100 foot property is impossible to do it I agree I agree with you 100% answer from then then you don't you wouldn't be able to satisfy that one you have it's not you're not required to satisfy that one will you be able to get you know all the other AIDS you may not be able to do it that's then you would you're not getting the bonus that's why the architect makes the big buck he's got to figure out the the problem but again Robert maybe the answer the real answer there this this property of 100 foot depth is not appropriate for this commercial building where I need to put a parking garage I think that that might I I with all due respect that that comment to me is you know really on 100 foot property that you own in in most of the gables it's not appropriate to do a commercial prod a parking garage where you need depth to be able to park cars 90° on both sides of a driveway it so you mean that you can do it Robert you can do a lot of things then you means that you're going to do a one story because you won't be able to circulate on the garage if anybody's yeah I I mean but again that's one of the you could do the garage without the liner just don't check that Mark I guess I don't I don't know if you've put one of your projects through these 12 to see if you it's not it's not one of the criteria that I that can help me so I don't use it I use the other eight that'll help me I mean that's just part of the strategy but Jennifer I think you have a good point you know that is that was a good question yeah you don't add we're feasible you just don't use it mhm but they the concern is that if you have an entire block and you can only line a portion of that block we can add something that it says for the Front Street for example on the primary Street or something know but you cannot say completely off because it's talking sorry I'm I just had a board of Architects meeting today 5 hours long there was a lot of argument so I'm sorry I'll back off a little bit um but I I think maybe that's the answer maybe if you have a site that's an island like Glenn's project that has four facades maybe we add verb it just says two frontages one Frontage you know we understand is there's a front and there's a back you know people have front faces and back you know so not everything can be beautiful oh yeah on all sides so apply the same and the last comment is like the back of house you know there there if you have a only one street and there may be only one street you have no choice but you have to put that F evolv right in the front so there was there was a section here that that talked about back of house towards the back of the property if you have an alley I think it's a no-brainer a no-brainer but if you don't have an alley you have no choice but I I think Robert what we're trying to get at is is is to get the architect's attention to these things with like Transformers uh FP uh double detector check valves you know all the infrastructure stuff that's required on Project arbitrarily gets delegated to engineers and then all of a sudden I'm walking on the sidewalk and I'm looking at this beautiful painted red back below preventer and and the only reason this was there is cuz the draftsman for the engineer that did the piping put it there on is not something not necessar not not always sometimes no I know not always but trust I I do this on a daily basis I'm reviewing these things yeah and and I talked to the architects in hindsight because some of these projects have gotten ahead of me or were here before I was and I asked them why did you guys decide to put the back flip rner there for example the vanera project has that issue I was filming walking a sidewalk on that project and I ran into the back flow and I said who in their right mind would put a back flow in the middle of a sidewalk and nobody thought you know it could be recessed it could be out coded it can be put in the service dock where the services to the so there's there's ways around it I know we have to negotiate with fire department people and I and again we do it daily in my office I'm constantly talking to the fire department and trying to figure out hey can we move this can we screen it a little bit can we set it back can I recess it can I do it vertically instead of horizontally you know there's always five ways to stay in the C but notoriously a lot of people don't pay attention that and that's something that's come to the Forefront in the last five or six years again that that has come before me because I'm the City Arctic and everybody comes to me and says hey I got a problem how do I fix it so we we try to figure these things out so these things are on our radar now my board of Architects I guys ask them where the equipment is ask them where the switch gear is where's the meter where's the Transformer where's you know cuz again you know we're looking at projects 20 minutes half an hour sometimes 45 minutes do you know where the David Williams um yes FPL Transformer is no no no I know it's on top of the roof it's on top of the roof on top of the roof and and they had problems there to get to that it was absolutely unbelievable the problem is that today with FPL you would never be able to you can negotiate with them FPL is very tough to negotiate with I I do it again weekly I I have to make that call to the engineers and why here can we I just we just went through it on the village uh Jennifer and I went through it on the village project with an AT&T switch gear box that's a monster that's 6' tall or and they want to put it right in the front of the the building no can we find a better know on the on the on the corner where there's a garage or something that's a service entrance an alley a walk a driveway something and get it off the main presence of the building so there's things that we can do and again we try very hard and I know my board does it very good on a weekly basis they are all over these things there's a lot of information in this code that you guys have brought to light that I think is great ammunition for them to use moving forward but these things are are discussed all the time in our board meetings and I want to give you guys that Comfort level I know you have issues with buildings that have been built and that don't look great and and and have problems but I think the awareness is there and I think that's the most important thing that we've done is bring this thing to the light and say guys we need to pay attention to these things that keep recurring and we're and we're fixing them you know we're working on it really hard and on a weekly basis and these guys are are all over that thank you Felix um just going back for a minute you know after the prerequisites we're going to level one you have to get six out of 12 why not 10 out of 12 8 out of 12 why 6 out of 12 because I think what's what's happened is this is the same number that has been used in the past correct but now it's been refined and refined and refined where you can get I think it's six for uh M mul family and eight eight for for uh uh mixed use you're 100% you're correct though that and and the credit is not the full credit no okay so it's it's it's incremental you feel comfortable with that yeah it's incremental yeah and and that's to Robert's point I mean that this one box you don't check but you're checking all the other boxes so right well you've taken a lot of the things out of the boxes that were well a lot of things a lot of things have been yeah but a lot of things have been put in the pr which were not there before so you're starting off with a much better building to begin with correct so I mean I think ju is right the tools that have been implemented in this round and it's taken a while but I think really a lot I think the buildings are going to start off at a better you know at a better Baseline I I I agree with you and the uh on the next page after where Robert was on sustainability I I don't think it should be a bonus element I I think it it should be more like what the city of Miami city of Hollywood Miami Beach does where it becomes you know if you have a project of a certain size you know you must do it but I don't think it's in that part of the code already of the Florida building code that you have to have there are certain elements of sustainability that are there but I know what what what staff is looking for is is more more of when you look at all the elements Robert they're they're uh more of the green you know qualifying for green capability but I I think in the county for example every building has to be minimum is it silver sort of you know building I don't think so I'm I I don't think so and I'm the reason I'm almost sure that it's not in the Florida building code that it has to be in the zoning code is because we have you know 150 jurisdictions in the State of Florida which use the Florida building code yeah so I I think for example the r requires a is the sustainability in the zoning element if you're in the in the GRE development District so I you know there are Parts there are some areas that have it already in the So based on the size of the property the trigger lead or comparable um right the point I'm trying to make is I'm I'm just saying sustainability doesn't look mediterranian you know I'm I'm just saying pull that out pull that out of here and and and put it somewhere else and still achieve what you want to achieve like everybody else does and and uh and like I said you know all the different jurisdictions have their own different things but I mean for me um I I want to see see something physically that helps the building look more I don't think it's a prerequisite I think it's a you know listen that the the TR of the matter and all your components that you're using in a building today you're going to be 100% or 95% there right but you you know you you go through it all the time and then the thing is that for example you know we're doing a building and then uh you know we're we're complying we have people that will certify the building to to a certain level Etc but normally what happens is there's a threshold as you said the size of the building so once you have the size of the building which you have a bigger carbon footprint then you go you go from there and and what I'm just trying to say is that one thing has nothing to do with the other I I also I don't think it belongs it shouldn't be a part of a med bonus requirement it should not we're going to be in agreement it should not be there twice twice and once with yeah no I I agree 100% wholeheartedly and and then um one of the things that I didn't quite understand is uh the next one the number seven on page 16 each multifamily zone property shall provide at least 20% of the required ground level landscape open area percentage based upon total lot area as publicly accessible what is the average size of the required ground level landscaped area if you if you can so what family usually is requirement 25% open space so for example let's say that um we have 100 by 200 ft it's 20,000 s ft 20,000 ft * 25 5,000 ft 20% of that which is a th000 square ft has to be accessible to the public that's on 100 by 200 ft which is a pretty good size you know average okay so if you reduce that by 1 half that's 500 square ft for Public Access can you explain what the open area as publicly accessible means right so the 25% in our zoning code is a requirement for multif family for to be open space right 20% of that space needs to be in the front yard so what this is saying is that that 20% that's already requireed to be in the front yard would be publicly accessible okay because it doesn't it doesn't give you the location and and this is this is the point I'm trying to get to back in the day you know we had green is this something I said yeah okay um so Felix if I may before you continue I just want to make note for the record um that chip Withers had to leave and we are now one two three four board members here thank you continue right thank you so the the back in the day our setbacks were larger now our setbacks have become minimized mhm okay and and and now what we're saying is there's going to be public accessibility you know to this minimized you know uh as an option sure as as an option right so in areas I don't have a lot of open space what I'm trying to figure in my mind is what is the design ramification of putting that in there in other words you know one thing is to say I did the formula the thing is to you know put it to to test I don't I don't see the advantage uh is you maybe that you don't fence it or enclose it or is that's not allowed in multi as well but multi family usually has um limited access to Parks right there's a lot of people living in the same area you only have one large Park so it's um allowing your neighbors to use the front area for dog waste or sitting down or you know the point I'm trying to make is one of your typical buildings you say what 10 ft is your your front setep okay so so now I'm doing the calculation now I got 10 ft * 200 ft that's 2,000 ft so by the time you put the driveways in to have access to the parking structure and everything else is what is the public benefit to providing this because it's almost like um it becomes almost uh like a base number in other words you already have it what I'm saying is how how is this providing you know that Mediterranean component for level one or level two you know what what is it I and the reason I struggle with this is you know be careful what you wish for our setbacks now are so minimal that the people that are occupying these these buildings don't have any green space so therefore now the big thing is well we're going to give them more height if they give us a park uh then then the parks are minimized but the height is so what I can't wrap my head around is I can't understand how this has become an incentive for the style of the architecture unless you said well they have to be you know fountains there has to be an improvement I think the intent maybe is for the larger projects maybe is the 20% is more applicable cuz you mentioned 100 by 200 that's a small yeah that's that's how that's the size of a big house in The Gables right 100 by 200 is not is nothing in my opinion a commercial property or you know but that's a 20,000 score foot lot right right so you could do a 20,000 but I I think the intent is when you say the park to provide more green space you know to leave it open and and I think one example is the one building on uh Valencia here that they did a Green Space on the corner yep that the idea is to leave that open for the public not not necessarily the 100 by 200 strip setback in front of the building right the proportions of that Park are really nice and it's a nice pedestrian public area and to me makes sense because you provide a little you know pocket park for the for the community for the city but uh what I'm you're getting to my point the point is that if you say it's not just you know grass and some some Shrubbery there because nothing not much more can go in there but now if you say well we're going to put benches we're going to put I think intent I think that's the intent and that's how we amplify the look in the Mediterranean and you know trellis seating area it's not here I know I know I now if you're if you're saying we're going to provide the benches and we're going to provide you know the The Hardscape and we're going to provide the fountains and things like that that was the original in and again Felix I I would say that that this scenario if brought to us from a applicant and a substantially large project or larger project in 100 by 200 where they would dedicate and say hey I'm I'm using this point for my project here's my 20% Park area Green Space whatever you want to call it I think the board at that point would pounce and say hey what's happening there is it is it just s are you doing fountains are you doing a trellis is it a covered space is it an open space we had something similar that just happened which was I think part of it was with Publix in that Park um on the back correct and part of it was was it to be open space was it not to be open space did it have statues did it not have statues right by the same token I think when we start looking at parks and what's the use and the programming you know we have a Parks and Recreation Department that also gives input to the city correct I just don't know if that's within our purview to State what that Park should be as far as whether it should be a passive Park an active park or a dog park Mr chairman I the biggest problem I have with this is that when I look at the computations ETC there there's if you at a fountain and you have it in the right style and you have the right design it could be very complimentary to Mediterranean architecture right now there's nothing there's there's there's nothing that you're getting back that that augments and enhances the style of architecture that you're promoting that's my problem so we could add you know make sure you have um improvements such as seeding or fountains parth please please not bicycle racks not this not that you know it's no no I don't it's not intended at anyone what I'm saying is that for God's sake if if Al although I am you know one of the positive things that you do see at the plaza is that you see amenities at the ground level a lot that are substantial that do enhance so that is something that you can codify to give an improvement and a check off but it should be complimentary not a technical thing such as a bicycle rack or or or just a bench no it has to be seating things that are are are contributing to the Mediterranean I mean not only to the public realm I mean because at the end of the day you want to do something beneficial to to to the you know to the neighborhood not necessarily because you know the style of Fountain should not be you know I prefer and by the way typically in a in a 20,000 ft lot you don't have that many option to provide a Park you know that happens on my point on the lar but that Urban component many years ago with the bank of Coral Gables on om Maria we provided some little areas in just just enough push and pull where it gives you and it enhances that I mean if you walk through the streets of granat and and you see these little elements throughout there there's absolutely no doubt and we're talking about centuries and centuries and centuries of development which which from one one people to another people it it it just augmented the architecture and complemented it this doesn't say that and it should say it not just you know an improvement but something for the board of Architects to see and say this is what we're looking for to be able to make it a better and a complimentary type of thing and this is at the ground level scale which is extremely important absolutely ground SC Felix should that Park be compatible with the building or should that Park be compatible with the neighborhood which to me when a developer donates or gives a park or does a park it's meant to be used by the surrounding neighborhood because it's lacking Green Space or it's lacking a park but but also your your uh let's say you're walking down the public sidewalk okay and you know you have your parallel parking and you have your Landscaping there so now you you provided you know a a a beautiful Fountain which is illuminated at night now you're walking your dog at night you know and you see this and this is something and it's open to the public and someone could sit down and catch their breath or just enjoy the evening if you do it in the right style you feel feel like it's part of the architecture so not just taking a piece of artwork and just sticking it there what you're doing is you're incorporating elements that are part of this particular open space that enhances the quality of that architecture it should be compatible but you know phix necessarily that I think that each little part should not have a prescriptive you have to do this you know should be because look look at what happened you know in a time in Cora every building had a coua okay you know I I don't think I I think that the bu the park should be each Park should be you know but this is not has own identity I I want to be clear this is not a park yeah it's not a park a publicly accessible area which means that it can't be contained it's open to the sidewalk visually physically that's the intent the reason I gave gave you the description of walking down the public RightWay sidewalk is because this is where you have the ability of going into the property to make it accessible to the public making it wider and making it more of a of a TR not a not a hallway down the middle of a building you know and and I think that's important and you know I don't have to explain to you you you know exactly that these elements just enhance the architecture and they could be compatible with but if that's the case then should the board of Architects at the time that they're looking at the building also be looking at the design of that green space before it goes further well I mean this is this is the architect has already provided a design for the board of Architects right but at what at what stage at what point does that parket I think at the boa level at the very beginning yeah we're we're very comfortable with that and we expect that thing we don't want somebody just to show a site plan and not show anything there we want to see what your the intent is what what is the use what's the activity what are you trying to do here I'm okay with that you know and I think that's again what the board does and and you know that could be easily incorporated into the grand entrance of the building absolutely I mean it could it could be done in in so many different ways at so so much scale but I think it's important to be very specific about the Improvement that is made to enhance you know that experience yes we can have that done yeah okay and then um the open space fund which is the next one the open space fund fund Fund in other words you know here's a check and and and check it off I I I don't think you know again that doesn't enhance the architecture in any way shape or form you know stroking a check to put it into a fund you know and and God knows if or where was used I feel I feel like this like impact fees you know every time we pull a permit we pay hundreds of thousands millions sometimes for impact fees we don't know where the money is going where's the Improvement where's the enhancement where's the offset so I don't think that this should be an item I think staff could come up with a better item than this in my opinion and and I think that you know um contributions you know for things like this that could happen you know at a commission level but that that has nothing to do with the board of Architects or the style of the building or the bonuses in my opinion I'm assum I'm assuming this particular item is there for the project that doesn't have the availability of the open space because of the site constraints no no no they still have to meet their open space require they still still have to do this so this is an excess of that exactly say yes right and and and again it's just what I I just don't see the the the checking off of this element to enhance you know for for a mid bonus what do you think the reason that it was put there in the first place was I don't want to you've been around the city a long time no I I I don't want to go there I I think you know look one of for me one of the the subjects that has been continually a a issue for me is is the pad right so the pad was put in for a certain reason which was specifically the Douglas entrance project and then for dozens of years it wasn't it wasn't touched now a pad is used for everything and therefore variances are not required so you don't have to go to the board of adjustment for variances because you're using a pad the pad was put in specifically to be a ble to do something like redo the Douglas entrance and save it the way it was but now it's become like a normal thing so what was the reason that was the reason on that specific subject what is the reason here I think that we have we have uh an issue in the city that has to do with the lack of parks that we have but that's a different issue that should be an issue that should be a discussion by the commission you know and the Parks and Recreation board or whatever but I don't think this has anything to do with the style of the architecture Mr chairman but when a check is written for that to check that off do we know where the where does the funds go so there is a Parks um acquisition fund that I would go into and it probably be earmarked that it came from a metab bonus um Criterion to be used B into U multi family or mix use districts that's the intent and again the the the question is H what did you do to improve that and make it a better Mediterranean style building but aren't you then using those funds to improve other neighborhoods or other areas that actually need it I I agree conceptually with what you're talking about but it's like sustainability the one one thing has nothing to do with the style of the architecture it it has nothing to do the previous one if you do the improvements Etc then then you're talking about something completely I I I I understand and and you know it doesn't doesn't improve the the the the the quality of the indirectly it does but it does indirectly it improves the city the overall context the the broader context I mean I I think that's the answer if that's valid or not that's what it's doing again there's an improvement down the road somewhere maybe across the street may not be Project Specific not not specific to this guy we're not talking about the style of architecture see agree and that and that's a remember Med bonus what's the outcry uh uh Med bonus for Med architecture right now it's like you know we put money in a fund and and you get to check this off has nothing to do with the style of the architecture but it's a vehicle to get funds without a doubt in areas where it's needed kind of like the art in public places I mean charge 1% and goes fund and that gets put somewhere it may not be on your project it may not be on your block but it amplifies and beautifies I'm glad I'm glad you said I'm sorry I'm glad you said that we have a tree Fund in this city I know the amount of money that's in the tree fund my question is where are the trees going there's where's the accountability for that so the the point is here we're discussing it's the same thing as if we put something for additional trees wait a minute what does that have to do with the style of AR architecture nothing I mean this is the the board of Architects is looking for give me tools to be able to make sure that the architecture is really good and it's really Mediterranean inspired etc etc etc has nothing to do with you know putting money away to do something somewhere which God knows where and it goes back just the same as the impact Fe yeah I I agree I mean writing is a check is simple but it doesn't do anything for this project I think again I guess it's it's not a requirement it's it's one of the ones that you may or may not use correct gives somebody an alternative that may not have any other options I don't know again I'm not justifying it I I think I understand your point I I don't think I I do understand your point but um well Point well taken yeah let's let's move on okay the the next page the sidewalks plazas and Courtyards U page 17 number nine um the sidewalks closes and Courtyards minimum of 25% it kind of trails off uh did did you mean to say can you say of what 25% of what so we can add back in the to ground level Paving area or Paving service if that's needed that's fine so it says sidewalks plazas and Courtyards plazas and Courtyards minimum of 25% of the lot area of the required well you can see the area that was crossed out so it's a total ground level Paving surface oh it should not have been crossed out yes you can see that right yeah okay so it should have stayed in there I put that okay got it so that was a strikeout the strikeout was unintentional strike O strike o instead of a typo now now this is this is rightwing or is this public property uh private property private property private property right yes so why is Public Works the the decision making factor and not boa I think this is everything it's a sidewalk sidewalks Plaza and Courtyard closet and Courtyards are typically in private property sidewalks are outside and right away I that's why I'm asking I I agree with the city architect I should I think it should be a uh a co- approval okay I mean if it's a plaza if it's a courtyard it's mine it's in it's in my domain if it's in the RightWay I I give it up to right to public works all the time I don't necessarily agree with it but I I have no choice and and the reason I don't either is because you know here we go again Street lighting you know all these different things come on I mean it's just we have the boa I don't think public anyone in public works is going to say no we don't want to hear their opinion I think that's the best thing we could do is add them in there too so I should be under the jurisdiction of The Bu pavement Hardscape back in the day it was in there so and typically it is I I I think when you go in for in you know for a project you're showing you're right you know all the plazas and everything you you know I mean I think I think it's proba there for the sidewalks it's it's us we have we actually have a requirement for material board it has to have physical samples of what they're proposing that's right so again that's already it's already there already included in the deal yeah we have that but the way this is written you know this I know that's why this what happens when you add things and you add things and add things you make one change and then all of a sudden it doesn't make sense later on and then someone makes a wild interpretation yeah I know that's why I I mentioned it and by the way the reason the city has a coral Carl Gable ba beige sidewalks is not because of a civil engineer is because of the original Architects that designed the city so uh if you go down to number 10 public art so when you look at public art we have the art and public places already there right so why would you add public art there as one of the needed requirements when it's already part of the statutes that we have to comply with public art I can I in on I think the the logic is the Arts in public places domain is the artwork and the board of Architects domain is the context around the artwork and where it goes and how it's situated how it's placed I think and and just to be clear the art and public places requirement is payment of the art and public places fee and so a a an applicant can seek a waiver of the fee by then including the artwork in their project which has to go through the process for including the artwork on the project but you can just pay the fee and not have the public art on your on your project right so this would be if you I guess you know to satisfy that one it would be you have public art incorporated into your project it would not you wouldn't be allowed to use the fee as a check mark right okay I I think that's what that the intentive of that is unless Jennifer has other context for this and this is this is the existing language as well I mean once once you see public it it seems like all bets are off there but this may allow like what you were saying about artwork or a fountain or something that blends better into the project be integrated into integrated we want right we're trying to get cohesion between art public places and the boa because if they want to use this even if they want to pay for art and public places and they use this check mark I assume they also have to use public art within their project yeah oh yeah and let me just jump up to a B for a minute expanded sidewalks wids beyond the property line you you mean within private property correct this is beyond where if you look at B oh again existing language so I I guess within the priv proper sidewalk maybe within the right way right away or something within the private property line where where is this supposed to be the I think it's within the private property line I'm assuming is what it means we can go back sidewalk yeah we the the cont it's existing language so would you review that so that we can see where yeah what's within the what the intent is and where it came from or because I I would think that you know if if U you know they could look at the sidewalks outside or uh or um what do you call it a um what did you call it not a bicycle lane you called it a what Lane Mobility L mob Mobility Lane right um you know where where do you draw the line of saying this is part of the things that belong to this building and and and maybe the intent there is maybe like a plaza or something internal to the property that kind of bleeds out into the public area g g is there is said water features fountains or is similar water features ground and or wall Mountain but anyway I just wanted to make sure because then the bottom paragraph above amenity shall be consistent in design and form with the City of Coral Gables Public Works manual in addition to the board of Architects approval I yeah I mean they're already reviewing this this is no no no the way that it says it is these it you know the last thing I need is for someone say okay you know we have a concrete pole this is this is going to be the concrete pole and and it's in the manual you know you could have it in the manual you need to have boa say yes or no right yeah let's help out the civil engineers a little bit you're the one Engineers making all the decisions that's the fear I hate to say it but that's the reality they they look at things differently with different criteria and so do we we look at it again from the perspective of the Aesthetics and not the technical right but here you're you're looking at it to be able to give some and again going back to Item B should we say instead of expanded sidewalk expanded pavement so we don't I'm not sure if if a bigger or wider sidewalk is better than pavers or something more decorative or more ornate but or no you know I I don't know I don't know if I want to look at a 20ft wide sidewalk in front of my building I'd rather see a 10ft sidewalk that's the RightWay pedestrian area and then there's pavement that's contributing to the Aesthetics of the building and the site the project the look I again I'm just worried about the word sidewalk because that implies the Coral Gables beige standard sidewalk with the score lines at 5 ft and do we want to look at that when it's 20t 30 ft wide is that a positive thing or is that something that's just there you know that's my perspective on that I agree I think the word pavement opens it up to interpretation to it could be concrete it could be pavers it could be some other material that would be conducive to a nicer product are you allowed today to put papers within the sidewalk on a project on the public RightWay on the public RightWay we don't that's typically right uh Public Works domain again I we have this argument all that's very difficult because I would love to do that but they don't allow me yeah and they win all the time so if so if a project has a driveway or something that protrudes out for example in residential areas they have a do pays we're allowed to do it in residential with covenants with correct with covenants and insurance and so subject to it's a public works review process okay but in commercial you're not allowed to do it I think you're allowed to do it it's publica the same thing right Covenant that they have to right so then if you're allowed to do it are you saying that if you have pavers in the approach and you have pavers in the driveway the part that's a sidewalk it has to go through has to go through it can't I think that happened at Gable's Village I think we had that same discussion in Gable's village where they had pavers in the driveway and we recommended pavers in the approaches so now we have a p five fet of concrete and then p and I said no make it all p no you can't do that it's got to be concrete blah blah blah so got it I lost that battle essentially would be subject to Public Works review yeah so the the next item on number 11 on the passrs the only mention is there there's no mention of height and one of the things about these you know buildings and the pasos and all this stuff is you know you you feel like you're in a dungeon sometimes right that that again Felix is is a is under the purview of the board the board board is all over that when they look at the projects I mean again other projects have been built and you're right there's 8ft ceilings on these PES that look terrible but I can tell you that in today's world and and going back maybe four or five years that's been heavily scrutinized by the board terms because people are seeing what we buil and the height and and the and the scale and and you know what the Ambiance is there and so we we work on that I don't know if you want to dictate that here maybe give a minimum but it's it's well under the the scrutiny of the board so let's see right the last item yeah that that's part of that that strategy is a proportional analysis is in another part of the code when you have an opening in a building there's a certain width and height proportion and relationship that has to be maintained so that's again that's I think that's inherent already but if you want to uh F tune it some more the the only the only thing here uh number 12 which is the last item before level two um is that when applicable complete the undergrounding of existing and new overhead utilities Etc I want to bring up Publix for just a minute um undergrounding was required but then the question became adjacent to the building three blocks down you know it it gets to the point I remember those people were sh shocked because it was not just adjacent to their property it was like going down the street so I I just no no no this is this is it says underground utilities this is one of the things you could check off underground utilities one appal complete one of the few things that has nothing to do with the style of architecture that I agree with because you want to get those wires down and all that right so says when applicable complete the undergrounding of the existing and new overhead utilities along all public adjacent to the building site I think that's the way it should be written but how how did we request so much more from Publix on the undergrounding there because that was a plug benefit that was just by staff so they had a pad and remember they had the the south side of the street that didn't have any windows or doors facing the street public are we talking about the one over here leun the new one but there's some cases where projects Public Works requires that the utilities extended Beyond yeah like water Ms fire lines I mean that's done all the time but one I I did a project that that the waterm St was a mile away yeah that's and that's the burden of the developer yeah really that's the price you pay for building big projects you know that's just the nature of the Beast here in the city well one one of the things we don't control that that's that's a negotiation that's done even on on Glenn Pratt's project there was an issue of a ball you know right or wrong right whether you know that was required at the last at the last not the last minute but you know at at the end and they they were kind of uh squarely about it because they they didn't know what it was going to cost M you know imp right so one of those things that you know when you're when you're working you know with with uh the developer when you're working you know with the applicant um you know kind of in my opinion is kind of be straightforward about it and by the way uh like I said I was in Boston recently all their Mobility lanes are green every single one is painted green and I don't think think we have it standardized yet here but just so you know Boston has them green everywhere I took pictures of well that's what we if I recall at the last meeting we had we were talking about standardizing suggesting to the commission to standardize an a Mobility Lan Mobility bik bik yeah the bike we wanted we were thinking about Mobility because in today's society it's more than bike right you got scooters you got anything else it but it should be standardized so one project doesn't have a green the other one has it yellow or somebody so forth you know it should be looked at so so Felix I guess your your question is is the the sentence correct the way it is or do you want to modify no no I I I think it's correct the way it is but I wanted to ask staff because of you know a couple recent applicants where you know they extended beyond the site the building site I mean by the time it gets here it becomes a condition and then you know the the applicant is flat-footed because they anticipate yeah there and and they were you know I don't know if they it was a reasonable reason for them to have heartburn or not but they were definitely not happy and and the the point is that I I want to make sure and and after staff explained that because of the pad they could they could ask you know and I get it you know but now I understand so the the wording here is consistent with that and uh Mr chairman that basically is level level one on level two I promise I have just a few comments and and um one one of the things that we didn't discuss prior to is is the we kind of discussed it the last time and that was the best practice manual on page six number one page six or page 19 number one uh your your PDF page number six uh number one which is the prerequisites table so in here it says on the upper right hand portion of the page presec precedence uh appropriate to the proposed building shall be uh referred visually as provided in the best practice manual or documented in the historic American Building survey I think that that it should be online not only for the applicant the owner the board of Architects the everybody the public so online yeah yeah so it's on cables.com metr design you'll find it there it is there yes and and then also um before we continue if we can for the record let us show that Javier Salon board member has joined us thank you for coming were you were you able to put up all your shutters luckily I don't have to but uh I was at a commission meeting so it went long so um I'd like to just jump forward to page 24 of the Coral Gables Mediterranean architectural design um a so I I I said that and I said it publicly the last time that um that there should be uh pictured examples and and put on the uh on the city's website of each one of these examples um yes they will also be providing the same website c.com design those all these pictures of all these buildings will be there if not plans accompan with them elevations be able to help Architects perfect thank you very much you know Al also uh last time Brett Gillis uh a resident I had a suggestion for uh in including another building or two uh is good examples and we looked that yeah so that was discussed with the board of Architects they reviewed that image and other images that he said to take out and remove yeah we went through that whole list and weed like these lists the Brett Gillis projects the projects that were there and I think we came to the conclusion of this is the the final list yeah I don't recall if if Brett's project made it or not I I know they looked at it they discussed it do you remember Palm Beach there was a beach project what's it called can can staff pal Beach Town Hall is that it no no it's here it's not here we did look at it have you we did review it and and can't you as an architect come in with your own example for for review you can do whatever you want as an applicant yeah these are just these are just suggestions but you know the architect might find something different he can come in with absolutely you can bring it whatever you feel is appropriate you know the board will will judge it and and you'll hear answer right but regarding the examples in Brett Gillis I mean we should get back to him and or you know acknowledge what he suggested do you know if that was included his his yes so that was the same list that we had gone through back in May I believe with the board of Architects that was months ago okay and they they're included in here not all of them were included because the board did not feel comfortable with all of them right okay I suggested too could you be kind enough to write him a response sure from you know coming from the boa through staff and you know because he he did take the time to to do that and I think it's important and the other thing is that um the only objection I have is the San Sebastian apartment I know that they're simplified uh they are historic uh the proportions are are there that is part of the the history of the cardboard College as you know the University of Miami was literally on the site of what is today the Coral Gables war memorial youth center and the housing was that right and I think that it may not be the most ornate it may not have been you know blessed at that time but I think that the historical context of that uh building is extremely important uh as simple as it is you know it doesn't have the the push in and out Etc but it does have several element the board looked at that and and had that discussion and and we understand historically the significance of the building but I think the board looked at it from a aesthetic perspective and and the characteristics of what's there and deemed it that it wasn't uh I don't want to say appropriate but we felt that there was other Pro other projects or buildings that were more impactful in terms of showing someone what we expect and what we what what the city wants and and we felt that the St Sebastian wasn't up to that par in terms of design Affinity or design Aesthetics wasn't at the top of its game I me well of course and again that was a decision collectively by the board we voted yeah as a board and some people keep in mind that that building survived the 1926 hurricane but the cardboard college did not yeah so you know I I'm just saying that I'd be happy to discuss it with the board again but I I we went through that we vetted it everybody and the reason as as minimalistic as it could you know is it is based on the times and the whatever in in all sincerity I think it's also going to be important in the future to be able to preserve that building historically I think that's something that maybe the board was not you know calculating that and uh and I also I also had a separate conversation after the meeting with the with the uh with the chair and and U historical no no with the boa chair oh okay yeah and and uh uh she truly believed that it was something that it wouldn't hurt to have it on the list that's my opinion everybody else here is no and and and again we we've we've had this discussion at board level and during meetings you know we have projects that come in at a residential scale that are historically design designated and and uh I I I want to say this in a proper way without hurting anybody's feelings but some historical projects are significant and important because of the historical value of what happened there and some projects are aesthetically important and and I think the charge of the board again is always Aesthetics and and what it conveys and what it portrays and what it looks like and we felt that the St Sebastian didn't really meet that standard is that uh again and it was it was a mix it was a mixed vote it wasn't unanimous we voted I think it was four to 4 to three or 5 to2 I I forget what the vote count I have a record of it but we debated it we discussed it thoroughly we brought up the issue of the historical significance of the building and it should be there but aesthetically what does it convey to a developer or some or an architect that's trying to to understand the essence of Mediterranean Design and we felt that that particular project did not meet that standard and So based on the the list that we had we felt that that one was not at that level so we opted not to vote for it but I can always go back to the board and and reiterate if you if you feel that that's significant then then I I would happy to entertain another discussion that's not a problem okay but and as you said the you know these are examples which are I think important to everyone they there are examples and u i I just you know I could just Envision sometime in the future someone saying you know we're going to knock it down and even the boa threw it in the garbage can you know so it's going to be on new one no we didn't throw in the garbage we just felt it wasn't to the level of the other no obviously projects a different budget a different and again once you put it into proper perspective with the cardboard College I think you're right yeah I mean I we we we we did our our job we looked at it we vetted it we we talked about it we argued about it and at the end of the day the decision was made and it didn't pass it didn't make the vote so right that's all I can tell you at this point but I'd be happy to do it again if if that's appreciate important to you appreciate it um it's not like we missed it that's what I'm trying to tell you we didn't know we're you know we did focus on it I got it in level two bonuses on page 19 um do you have any example on a on the minimum open space um it says the total square footage received from the building lot coverage increase is provided as publicly accessible street level open space and L do you have an example of that like a um we could provide that yeah I for me it was difficult to understand Yeah so basically right now there's uh no maximum um lot U building lot coverage um and we feel like that's kind of unfair there should be some kind of benefit for the public to be able to maximize your building to the setbox um so in exchange to try and allocate some of that land right for the public good but yeah we can provide that study that's fine thank you and then um the minimum square footage B the minimum square footage of open space shall be 400 ft how was that determined just so happens that 400 ft was done in the original one 40 years ago was that like pull Lou of there kind of thing um I think 4, 400 ft is also the minimum amount for open space maybe it's 500 actually I'm thinking about it um it's 4 500 so we can double check that make sure it's consistent with the minimum open space I'm just trying to understand where the number came from you know and and how it's applied on page 25 um B uh the multif family residential density bonus it's 25% so that's exting language right now that's taking it out of the the I think it was Table Three and putting as a standard um provision and a code okay so language is the same and then C exclusion from height as also right now in I think it's being relocated from one of the tables in the code so talking about the CBD the last three lines M there uh it seems like like it was uh says shall exceed a height of more than 25 ft above the roof such exclusion shall be subject to the provisions that no structure shall exceed a height of more than 25 ft above the roof except for mix use buildings in the CBD where no such structure shall exceed more than onethird of the allowable total height right that's right now existing link anguage and the Met bonus right so let's talk about that for a minute so what is the tallest building in the CBD today actually it's the Cina building 20 5et 205 205 so it's not there yet though but yes it will be oh it's pretty close yeah so I if you do the math the additional height is 13 that's a lot 80 ft 75 ft 7 I I I think 70 I think that's a mistake I don't say you made a mistake I I say this board should consider that I mean that that is in my opinion that's unbelievable you see it's and that's this is again not nothing personal but I mean this is like well we copy we paste we copy we paste but let's think about what it looks like you take a 200t high building 205 and then you add another 1/3 on top of it you're going to minimize the buil more that's I think the calculation was it would still be underneath the builtmore which I think is 315 ft or somewhere on there I'm I'm sorry let's throw in there now just for conversation live local act how is that going to look with a third on top of that li like can only go up to the maximum height that we have in the city though within a within a mile within in the jurisdiction but I I think that the proportion of taking this and adding a third on top of that I find it offensive I don't want to be I could tell the joke but I I'd get in trouble but I don't want to be on Chrome Avenue and be able to see the top of one of these buildings in Coral Gables it's ridiculous there's no need for it architecturally in proportion Robert am I am I missing something now when when you when you analyze it like that 13 of the total height may be more than than and then you need to right I um I don't know what that number is but before was 25 fet and and right no right now that one3 language is already in the med bonus it's already allowed I mean I don't know I wish well Javier and Peter could could opine them based on this as as Architects um what exactly can you then do on in within that onethird of the distance you know height what are your seual features Towers it's not habitable space k very tall koopula I mean do you need do you need to be oneir I mean I don't know honestly me no to answer you don't need to have so this is only an exception for the CBD correct yes the normal the normal requirement is a Max maum 25 ft above the roof I've heard is very limiting think about this one so now in the CBD area you have Alhambra you have Miracle Mile you have puns those are the three widest arteries in the CBD area now you're going to be on the interior Lots interior rways which are substantially smaller what on Earth are you accomplishing by putting something that's dispropor on top of the building which makes absolutely no [Music] sense why is here to begin with the board of Architects is going to review it so if it seems absurd if the lot is small it's a third it looks like it's out of proportion I'm assuming the board of Architects is going to on that will chime in on it right away but wait a minute wait a minute no no no no I I think that it should be limited to what it is everywhere else 25 would it be different in the CBD I don't see is it to to stroke somebody's ego I I I don't get it no I think the leftover sentence from Years Gone by well I I I think this is this is why we're here right I think we I I know that's not something that we discuss or requested or I I mean the 25 ft of this area if you look at Alan Morris's new project Alan Morris's project if you count the above the 14 ft how much was it I think it's 143 total something like that no it's 190 total 180 something total no which one which one the the one on on the Hambra the new one the new one that's going no the new 19 the one we're talking about the one on ponts and University St yeah the new one yeah the court reporter can't take this on if everyone's talking over each other no guarantee that's not one he came originally at 190 and we rejected it and went back know to 10 stories I thought it was 109 no no no it's like like 130 isn't it you know don't you okay I thought it was 115 but the top yeah yeah yeah yeah you think it was 120 with everything on top of it down oh it's 186 or something yes with the architectural features no no 186 with a tower no I know he's got a lot up there proportionally it goes High yes not 190 no at all no way no how we are remember that discuss guys in order to move forward whatever it is I I say I agree with Felix on this I'm I'm recommending it's 25 ft end of story let's get rid of it okay so let's that's your recommendation Let's uh Power Felix I got one last point that was no no let's move for yeah it depends on the project so that's so we get rid of the third is out out the door right the third is out the door so the recommendation is 25t perod this that that may not be sufficient depending on the project it depends on the it's a particular but not I agree with you one3 is excessive okay but maybe 25 ft depend on the project may not be sufficient honestly it should be a a function of the RightWay in front of it and the lot area that they have because I mean 25 ft may be nothing if you have an entire block but it would be significant if you have a 50 by 100t lot you know in my opinion I think the boa should help staff in coming up with the right proportion and the right maximum on the thing I don't have a problem with that but I think oneir is is absurd I completely agree okay and I all I'm saying is it should be tied it should go back to the board of Architects and come up with the formula based on the Frontage and the lot area that they're that they're looking at developing so so that it works out as a function and nobody has to break their head about it right yeah I I think it's a product of the building the design the mass maybe maybe 25 ft I'm talking about Frontage yeah and the footprint of the building working together to achieve that maximum all right and it needs to be some sort of function yeah but I think the one3 is is is uh mind-blowing and then the last page 27 article 16 why was that added the the term precedent means a building structure element um not everyone knows what a precedent means and since it's mentioned a lot in our tables we had to Define it so that we understand it's example of a building that's used for by an architect to or what whatever the definition is a building structure element of of design that's used by an architect not everyone knows what what a precent is it wasn't previously defined so now it's defined right but I I I think it's when you look at the way it's used legally right it's and you look at this definition it's kind of you know maybe there should be another um architectural precedent you mean yeah this I think the definition defines what it is it's not we're not talking about a legal precedent we're talking about a building structure element of of design that is used by an architect as an example or guide so that it's it's clear now so so the precedent you mean are the examples that you have there right of the the pictorial ones that yes okay and in my in my opinion I I think it should be architectural historic precedence you know for the for the definition you know and and or you know in the way to maybe the way to simplify it is to say pre you know precedent as used in in the zoning code this is in the definition section so that's why it's it this would this would be plugged into the definition section of the zoning code no I understand but what what I'm trying to say is that it's a it's an architectural historic precedent correct or am I wrong architectural precedent I'm I'm not sure I using the word historic if they're not there any historic buildings there's plenty of buildings that are in here they're not histor you just said that the Coral Gable medoran architectural design all application approval shall be required to satisfy all include the proportional systems as defined of the best practices where is the word used precedent there it's used I think in the prerequisites I remember correctly okay the precedent study because two precedents where train precedence number two on page six under the prerequisites the title of it precedence um go on me training precedence appropriate for the proposed building it uses the word precedence throughout the section so this is an area that we when we were reviewing this these changes and we were going through and making changes we saw there was a need to define the term so now we have a this would provide a definition for the term yeah I just I'm reading that precedence appropriate for proposed buildings shall be referenced visually as provided in the best practices manual but that's so when they present to the board they have a a sheet or a board that has their different precedents their example buildings that they're using um details and designs from in their proposed building no I understand I I'm just saying is that when you look at the definition you look at you know you look at this I mean I think there's a leap between the two um it's I don't think it's articulated the way you were intending to to use it in my in my opinion um I I just think that maybe either see if you say are you concerned about the term are you concerned about the the ter that we're using preced or the definition no I'm I'm concerned with for example here this this is a perfect example on page six precedent appr appropriate based on the best practices manual that the best practices manual and the examples of the buildings on page 24a right all those all those examples I think that's what you're intending to be the the precedent but when you go back to the best practices manual and the historical American Building survey none of those are are precedents well those example of those 20 something buildings are going to be in the best practice manual and diagram to show what you're going to put them in there yes correct yes I missed that because I've been asking for that okay so it'll be in the best practice yes just like today so then if you go back to the definition pres president refers to the building structures or elements as shown in the best practice manuals I don't think it's it's not limited to that right Jennifer we we did the the intent was not to limit it just to that because president doesn't just mean the buildings yeah we may not have every single 26 buildings in the best practice manual we will definitely try to because right now we only have eight buildings in there and we're going to add more Mr chairman in order not to to you know uh Dam this up what I'm I'm going to I I I would like to just take a look at it and maybe bring it up the next time and possibly come up with some verbiage that that both uh staff and the boa and legal can can agree to the thing that's fine and I I just want it to be uh simple for you know the Architects and the developers and the luse attorneys that are using it to everybody be on the same page so your concern is that it's not simplified enough or it or it doesn't point to a spec to a specific clear enough I don't think it's clear enough and I think it can be made clear and and it you know we don't have to throw the baby out with B well I'm sure staff welcomes your input on that those those are all my comments thank you Javier any uh I know you didn't get the I didn't get the benefit of of the previous discussion uh so far the comments that I've heard are similar to the ones I had so I'm hope assuming that those were the ones I had were were Incorporated thank you Mr chairman if you could explain to Javier what we're doing for the next meeting at the next meeting since we didn't have enough people here at this meeting there was several options that we decided either one was to go ahead and he left at 5:30 to just go ahead and cancel the meeting which we didn't the other one was to proceed with the meeting and not necessarily make make a recommendation at this time CU we didn't have a complete board and the members that Miss they'd be able to look at the minutes and see what was talked about okay thank you you're welcome um the question that I have is if you look at page six which would be under let me just go there page six under the pre pre prerequisite the prerequisites table correct item number three exclusions from height the following shall be excluded everything there is it's been relocated what we just read about yes okay can we go to that's the one3 of the lab building Total Building high in CBD that's where that came from that's why it struck through okay and can you guide me to where you relocated it please um it's in past all the tables cuz this a general provision on or C on page 26 that's the section we were just discussion discussing okay about the oneir ETC that language was already in there langage is in there okay perfect I cleaned it up yeah I'm good I mean everything's been really covered that we spoke about I mean Juan you know really your input you know coming here really helped us out to clarify a lot and and honestly and Gus coming here to clarify a lot of misconception that was with the board of Architects I think shed a lot of light for me it did and I'm sure for the other board members if Mr chair if you allow me I just going back to that to that clarification that Gus made and I just I don't I want to avoid further you know or maybe perhaps manage expectations a little bit um you know we we discussed how it would be appropriate for the board of Architects to look at the compatibility and and determine that a particular design is not compatible in at its current at the at the proposed height but I want to just make it clear I don't think it would be appropriate for the board of archs to say you know in this particular location a 100 foot building could never be compatible it would be this 100 this this design that's at 100 foot height is not compatible this design there could be perhaps another design that would be I just want to make sure that's that Nuance is clear yeah it is and Gus made it actually very clear with his examples and so forth thank you any other comments from the board on this at this time so go ahead pH I I was just going to say I I I'd like to make a a motion to continue this meeting till the next appropriate uh meeting to be able to uh have any additional comments from the board me uh the board members that weren't here for a portion of this meeting and then be able to discuss it and then make a motion at that time um you've got all of our comments written down and the recommendations that were made in the concerns okay good I mean Jennifer's really been doing a great job of keeping track of it striking out keep going I mean and and I think this was a very good move to have a special meeting specifically for this because you know you can't be distracted by other applications or other issues this is too big too big a uh a discussion when will the next meeting take place October 9th two weeks are you going to be here I may not be here I may not be here oh okay um meting is can we explore the possibility or or of uh moving that meeting or you need 30 days to do that we advertised we mailed notice and we mailed notice okay you mailed notice okay or you may continue with the meeting but you may want to move this right and then and then uh what we could do is possibly incorporate the other comments from the members that were not here correct and then you guys can catch up and then go after them I mean the the members that were not here today was uh Julio right and Chip Miss missum and Javier missum yeah okay I guess we would have to I was going to say I would put on the table my vote already just in case I'm not here but I don't think you can you can do that first all we don't have a motion even so you could not do that because otherwise you're going to be when are we going to in November conclude W that's a that's a that's a long time so we have some projects that are in the pipeline that it would be nice to be able to apply these new met train and related regulations too that's what I'm saying I don't know if we could wait till November may may I make a suggestion can we possibly have a second a second meeting as we had today in between the two next regular planning board meeting I'm perfectly okay and then that way we could we could bring it to I was going to suggest why don't we just have the next schedule meeting come in earlier for it because it doesn't I don't think we've got they're not going to be here for the next that meeting oh yeah that's the next meeting so we have to have a special meeting okay I missed it thank if we have a second if if we everybody comes up to you know everybody comes up to speed M and then you have a meeting a month from now this secondary the second you know special meeting then we could tie a bow on this thing agreed you want to notice is two weeks required for notice you need two weeks no not for notice this is just a legal ad so no not two weeks but I mean pretty close right Jill as far as getting to the newspaper and having it published just putting an example up there if we have a meeting on the 17th uh we meet the deadline for uh legal ad publishing that's where I was heading so just get a range of the dates from right now so be after the 17th and before the next meeting um I just I don't know my spe myself at this time I'm yeah I'm here in the 16th I think the 16th has board um historic preservation board where you going next stay home unless we have the meeting next next one unless we have our meeting at 4:27 what about the week of the 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th I'm available available that week problem for me can can we go ahead and possibly leave it up to staff to because they have to take a look if the room is available and what's available and so forth what were the dates again for that week Mr chairman what was it where were the dates October 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th that week so we have a commission meeting October 22nd yes okay would not be ideal what about the 24th which is a Thursday on the 24th the week before the 15th is that available and the 23rd is a Wednesday so 23rd or 24 Wednesday say that again please 23rd is a Wednesday I would just like to confirm exactly when I get back if if you guys are looking for me to be here on that um I'm assuming I will on the 23rd that's why I did that okay or or if it makes easier for you the 24th it's a Thursday and we could and I would suggest that we start at 4 and if it only takes an hour you we get it done a question even the following Tuesday the 29th to be safe right is that too late the thir the 30th is impossible I have a charter Review Committee on that day Tuesday 29th is I put out a text but I haven't gotten a response on my calendar unfortunately so we can send out some um dates and I guess you can check our calendar make sure you're available please so somewhere around those two or three we and what I would what what I would ask is we're not supposed to do a reply to all so if everybody when Jill puts out the dates if we can just reply to Jill by herself for the uh Sunshine laws that would work thank you excuse me so it would be October to check for October 24th or 24th or possibly the 29th okay and for 400 p.m. correct not for the 15th no I never said the 15 okay um do we need at 400 p.m. at that point I mean we've had extensive meetings on this is there not a reason that we can't meet at 6 o' okay and finish by the 9:00 if if we had to go that late that's I don't think it's going to take very long I agree okay 6 o' it is yeah when can we get the minutes for this meeting about a week from now our turnaround time is 10 to 12 days was this taped yes it's being taped yes it's being recorded on Zoom yes so so on I can send you the link tomorrow morning that's perfect that will help to zoom or on is it on YouTube as well yes okay I just want to check against my nose make sure we covered everything all right um is there a motion to adjourn I make a motion to adjourn excuse me I didn't have a second on the motion to continue that is correct who made the motion to continue Mr I'll second it we have a second to continue everybody in favor say I I I anybody against no motion to adjourn I make a motion Robert second by Javier all in favor say I I I thank you everybody you for your time thank you so you had a great time e e for