[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] this is I do it doesn't take long just have it uplo yeah [Music] that's [Music] oh [Music] so right because since you're not on Wifi it's not so it's [Music] I will take it out of the camera shot I do but not in the afternoon no oh I know I just don't I prefer not to have coffee in the afternoon good yeah yeah just super busy huh it's nice I enjoy it I'm super happy about the weather forgot my glasses [Music] [Music] for [Music] [Music] the [Music] [Music] [Music] all which I forgot do you have readers no I just like forgot and I wow but if you had two you would need so I've heard people who do that and I'm just like I've heard everyone just comp your brain compensates but I just freaks me out Anna Anna is everybody here is everyone okay [Music] hope great let's um call the meeting to order good afternoon welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the city of C Gables historic preservation board we are residents of C Gables and are charged with the preservation and protection of historic or architecturally worthy buildings structures sites neighborhoods and artifacts which impart a distinct historic historical Heritage of the city the board is comprised of nine members seven of whom are appointed by the commission one by the city manager and the ninth is selected by the board and confirmed by the commission five members of the board constitute a quorum and five affirmative votes are necessary for the adoption of any motion any person who asks as a lobbyist pursuant to the city of Cable's ordinance number 2006-11 must register with the city clerk prior to engaging and lobbying activities or presentations before City staff boards committees and or the city Commission a copy of the ordinance is available in the office of the city clerk failure to register and provide proof of registration shall prohibit your ability to present to the St preservation board on applications under consideration this afternoon lobbyist is defined as an individual Corporation partnership or other legal entity employed or retained whether paid or Not by a principal who seeks to encourage the approval disapproval adoption repeal passage defeat or modification of any ordinance resolution action or decision of any City Commissioner any action decision recommendation of the city manager any City board or committee including but not limited to quasi judicial Advisory Board trust Authority or councel or any action decision or recommendation of City personnel during the time period of the entire decision-making process on the action decision or recommendation which foreseeably will be heard or reviewed by the city Commission or a city board or committee including but not limited to quasi judicial Advisory Board trust Authority or councel presentations made to this board are subject to the city's false claims ordinance chapter 39 of the city of cro Gable city code I now officially call the city of cro Gables for preservation board meeting of February the 21st 2024 to order the time is 405 p.m. present today are on my left Mr Silva Miss da Mr Arin half Mr Maxwell on my right Miss Spain Miss Orlando Mr Gillis and myself Caesar Garcia Pond first order uh is the approval of the minutes is are there any changes or corrections to the November actually me State the name of the month the November 15 2023 meeting minutes can I have a motion to approve motion to approve the minutes of November 15th meeting 2023 motion by Mr Maxwells or second second by Mr orando all uh any opposed all in favor I I I okay motion carries unanimously um exp parte Communications please be advised that this board is a quasi judicial board and the items on the agenda are Quasi judicial in nature which requires board's members to disclose all expart Communications an expart communication is defined as any contact communication conversation correspondence memorandum or other written or verbal communication that takes place outside a public hearing between a member of the public and a member of the Quasi judicial board regarding matters to be heard by the Quasi judicial board any if anyone has made any contact with a board member when the issue comes before the board the member must State on the record the existence of the Exar communication the party who originated the communication and whether the communication will affect the board member's ability to impartially consider the evidence to be presented regarding this matter um Miss panas are there any deferrals for this afternoon good afternoon um I do have two requests for deferrals for case File uh lhd 20 23011 this is um the application for the designation of 415 Aragon Avenue um representation has been hired by the property owner and they have reached out and we will be meeting next week but they'd like to be heard at the March 20th um historic preservation board meeting um and the next item would be case File lhd 20227 this is the historic designation of 1221 milin Street which is uh was remanded back to the historic preservation board by the city City commission um this would also be deferred to the March 20th um hearing no other changes on the record March 20th yes so it's the first one and the last one yes the first one and the last one okay thank you um swearing in if any persons in the audience will be testifying today please rise and be sworn in if you're here and you're going to speak today please rise and please sworn in if anybody's on zoom and wishes to speak to be testified you need to be on [Music] camera thank you okay let's start um the first item on the agenda for a special certificate of appropriateness case File CP 223-3307 Aragon Avenue a local Historic Landmark legally described as lot 17 of the West 36.4 ft of lot 16 block 10 Carl Gable section B according to the plot thereof as recorded in plat book 5 page 111 of the public records of midday County Florida the application requests design approval for additions and alterations to the residence and site work the single family Residence at 517 Aragon Avenue was designed by architect William miam in the minimal traditional style it retains its historic integrity and serves as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city the work proposed in the application consists of two additions to the rear of the residents the first is a two-story addition to the Northwest that consists of a laundry kitchen breakfast room and bedrooms on the second floor the second addition at the northeast corner consists of a one-story Edition that includes a bedroom and covered porch to accommodate the new additions an existing laundry and family room will be removed as will the rear wall at the northeast corner portions of the Interior will be reconfig fed as well the additions are finished in a smooth stucco the additions are in an appropriate in the appropriate location to the rear of the structure and do not adversely affect the historic character of the existing structure the design complements the minimal traditional style of the historic structure and will restore components of the building represented in the original permit drawings the two-story Edition visible from Aragon Avenue is set back nearly 30 ft from the front facade of the house and the proposed one-story addition to the Northeast will not be visible staff requests that the following conditions be incorporated into any motion for approval the roof is to be a two-piece true true Barrel tile windows and doors are to receive high-profile muttons and glasses to be clear no tint or reflectivity and provide note on drawings add a note regarding the proposed Stu o texture at the additions on the permit drawings material to be specified for the new pool deck provide uh information and details of the proposed metal gates in the carport and sidey yards work with staff to possibly lower the height of the new trellis proposed in the rear Courtyard and a separate Su a separate standard certificate of appropriateness is required for the pool and pool deck and staff will handle administratively um therefore staff recommends a motion to approve with the conditions noted thank you does the owner or architect wish to speak are they all the same p yeah that work yeah point there good afternoon I'm Anna Alvarez I'm the architect for the addition and renovation to the Patel residence I'm joined by the owners here uh Puja and Sean Patel if you have any questions for us later um I just wanted to quickly go through the plans um uh thank you Anna and Cara for the report so the strategy was to do um an addition towards the back um and maintain the original um U volume of the house in the front the house currently has you know Barb Barb fences and just kind of some unattractive conditions that we're stripping the house of we looked at the original microfilm to bring back the window configurations we're going to be working with a company called Palm City windows that does although they're aluminum they can provide the thin profiles which is nice um for this this house um we're looking to bring back the carport which was original to the house um the garage towards the West Was added later and we are proposing extending it a bit cuz right now has like a thin structural um wall at the end that is not is not great and has a small it has like a very small footprint inside um so um just to go quick quickly through the composition so the idea was to layer the house so that the larger volume is in the back as Anna described on the northwest corner and a smaller one-story addition towards the east um so there's a small courtyard that separates the existing house from the new volumes um and it was the strategy was to do a series of additions versus one um one addition to also break down the mass um and these are some of the pictures the rear of the house which is the part that's getting most affected um you know had very little redeeming qualities right now um I have the original microfilm if anyone wants to see it and um we have landscape plans and sorry I was trying to go back to back just to this image if it helps to have the 3D up um thank you anybody have questions for the architecture staff before we go to public comment any questions question yes trying to get to the page the front elevation um some of the proposed addition with a circular window on the Second Story yes looks like that's going out to a rooftop deck why was that proposed to be a window rather than a door another feature it just seems undermask for the size of the space there so we looked at um so um we were looking at some examples of the early Deco houses in cor Gables um you know which this house takes some cues for and we were looking at some where they added a almost like an interesting detail like that of a round window um and it isn't roof Terrace it's just a flat roof cuz the space behind it is a bathroom so you wouldn't be walking out on it it's part of the composition to step up to the taller piece so that's a one-story transition um I'm sorry yeah one story flat roof transition from the main house to the two-story addition okay I'm I'm just looking at it on on the same slide you have there okay it just seems way under mass for that amount of space space that's there but that's my only I was just wondering if there was a technical reason that that was done no okay thanks thank you any questions or comments for staff for the architect Alex uh just one question uh for the architect and staff on the list of conditions um I think they're all pretty clear the I have a question on the one of regarding the height of the trellis okay um do you want to talk a little bit about that oh yes so you can see it um um mhm you can see it on this slide and I have others um so the idea was to have almost like a a hanging garden right outside of the the dining room area so we did make it a little taller than the eve of the house just so that any plants that were hanging down would be at that lower level but we can definitely consider it at a lower level if it's important to the board onto stuff can see it here in the bottom as well Mr Silva what do you think yes so you don't have an objection to working with staff to lower it if if necessary that would be fine thank you any other questions for the architecture staff thank you Anna we're going to take it to public comment and if you need something we'll ask you to come back okay thank uh is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak in favor of this project or case anybody on Zoom is there any in the audience that wishes to speak in opposition to this case Okay hearing none we're going to close the public hearing bring it back to the board um any discussion amongst the board on this project any thoughts Miss B I love the new plans very clever um I mean it really it's really going to live well and I do have one brief question for staff um why is it that you wanted the trellis to be lowered is it visible from by the street or something it's not visible the original condition was lowered to just be in proportion to the opening that was at the rear and just felt a little out of proportion with that that courtyard um so I thought maybe we could just bring it down just so that it matches the other height the height of the of the opening kind of more consistent with the opening Mr AR no okay um I did uh fail to ask if there's any expart Communications on this item if that was a good time to bring it up okay none um if there's no further discussion does anybody wish to make a mo motion yeah I can do that I would move to approve the design proposal for an addition at the residence and site work on the property located at 517 Aragon Avenue with the conditions noted in the staff report and also the recommendation to consider enlarging the circular window on the second story if you wish to do that but obviously not a requirement and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness with a condition noted is there a second second second by Mr uh motion by Mr Gillis second by Mr Orlando can we please call the role uh Mr Aron haft yes Miss Den yes Mr Silva yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss SP I don't have an issue with the hide of the trellis or the window but I'm going to say yes I mean I don't think it's necessary to change either one of them yeah I don't have a problem with it yes okay uh Miss Bando yes Mr Gillis yes and Mr Garcia Pon yes um motion passes 8 Z thank you next item case File COA SP 2023 032 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 1409 Al ambra Circle a contributing resource within the alhamra circle historic district legally described as the lot six and the north half of lot 7 Block 17 Coral Gables section e according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 8 at page 13 of the public records of mday County Florida the application requests design approval for an addition to the residence and site work variances have also been requested from article 2 section 2-101 4 C and article 3 section 3-38 D2 of the C Gable zoning code for the minimum rear setback for mechanical equipment and pool equipment thank you Miss C so location map of the property it's on North side of Al hamur Circle between cadis Avenue and Ferdinand Street as you can see it's just sort of to the northeast of the water tower as you come around the curb on alhamra um it's part of the Alhambra Circle historic district contributing residents it was designated as such in January of 2008 it's a 1940s uh photo of the house it was constructed in 1930 designed by Anthony zinc and there have been no additions or significant alteration to the property since its construction um so as uh the chair read The Proposal is for a two-story addition to the rear of the residence and site workor and also for three variances that have been requested um from the zoning code that have to do with the mechanical equipment and pool equipment um we can go over those later if you want or I can just explain the premise behind the request at the moment and then let the architect talk about it um which I think is probably easier so there is an existing um auxiliary structure on the property you can see it to the right of this picture that's approximately 6 ft from the rear setback as an existing non-conforming structure um 10 ft is required so it's as a historic property you all can grant a 5ot rear setback if it's um consistent with the neighborhood context um but in this case two of the required or requested variances um increase the non-conformity by putting it within that 5-ft setback so one of them maintains the existing uh six foot setback and the other two are set well within the 5T setback that's being asked for so um that's where those come from there are conditions that we want uh included as part of the approval process and the architect is here to discuss thank you Miss CS good evening my name is Callum Gibb I'm the architect for the residence um as you know it's a beautiful house on the prominent corner of um Al hambur and the talking about the addition first uh sorry these are a couple of pictures of the existing residence obviously the the um most affected is the rear of the house at the moment it has only a a single story projecting Bay and the the goal is to sort of uh add similar scaled elements to the rear to provide a covered Terrace and some additional uh second floor bathrooms uh this is a general site plan U comparing the existing to the proposed The Terrace is in the center uh of the rear the addition of the of the residence I an addition is uh been added to balance out with the existing projecting Bay and then the Terrace sits between the two that's just a large plan second floor they're currently um two bedrooms which have a Jack and Jewel bathroom and the intent is to add a bathroom to each of those and then convert the existing bathroom to a laundry on the inside existing front of the house the addition is um totally to the rear and will not be seen from the front uh the owners have um done a nice job renovating this house over the last few years so this is the main uh rear elevation that shows the the addition as I say we created a sort of a more symmetrical feel uh by uh sort of sizing the additions to the right of the house there to uh be the same size as the existing Bay and then create a sort of a projecting Center porch the we went back and forth a lot with um the owner and with uh the staff on how those uh second floor Edition should be roofed and it my personal thought was that the existing parit is actually very high it's like and so if we just sort of emulated that and wrapped it around without a roof you'd have this sort of Two and a Half story sort of mass right there in your rear yard so the goal was to uh bring that down by adding a roof to each of the additions and then uh again sort of um using the existing powerp as a backdrop creating a connecting uh uh roof to uh sort of Link the addition and complete the um elevation from the side the um uh as you can see the addition with its uh small slope roof it's an odd condition that the it does project above the parit but that's an existing condition of the on the uh on the West Side you can see on the West Side um the uh parit sort of bites into the existing roof and so we would sort of emulate that detail on the bottom of the drawing you can see that the section there shows that the linking sort of connecting roof is not full depth it's only it's quite shallow um but it will have um projecting Rafters similar to the front so the goal was to sort of bring the rear to more in character with the front without sort of imitating exactly but it felt like it was um by adding these layers of detail sort of completed the project in a way and that was it uh as far as the addition goes uh if you want to address the other um variances so uh this is sort of variance number one this is for uh the AC equipment for the garage structure uh it's going to sit behind the existing concrete stair and and align with the existing garage building so it does project into the rear 10t set back but uh does leave more than 5 ft uh the other um oops sorry that's the wrong one so the the additional um variances are for existing equipment and the proposed po equipment uh I'm not sure if I can blow this up but in the in the image indicating the rear of the property sort of the second column on the top there are two large air conditioning condensing units sitting right outside the back of the house and they were placed there when they did their last renovation sort of a holding Place really uh and the goal here is to move those two existing units to the area behind the garage um and also include in that as part of the um proposal we have a new pool and the goal would be to put the pool equipment in that um a sort of rear section as well got went again the other two are shown on on a on a1.1 of y'all's packets so the other two are shown on there sure there we go now it keeps going back to the same one pardon me let's try that one that's better yeah so again on the um right hand drawing the the you can see the three pieces of equipment so the the fortunately you can point with that at the at the oh my goodness screen you really should be able to ah so we're talking about this area here um for fortunately the the amount of encroachment does leave us 26 which is sort of the absolute minimum for any uh sort of approv setback or for equipment or or a building so I feel that it is the best place for it even though it does um encroach into the recommended setbacks so it's a if the uh if if it weren't there you know the other area would be out in this Zone here which I feel would be more of an eyesore to not only the neighbors um you but also uh coming across in the front of the house um we also discussed this this area in here but that would also require a variance and would actually put you next to the neighbor the neighbor in the rear the portion where this equipment is next to uh the house is quite close but off to the right or off to the left if you're looking and so it's in a little bit of a blind Zone anyway anyway as far as there's not really any room for an addition there there's not like a rear backyard area it's really just a little corner of their property so it felt to me that it was the least obtrusive place and I know in the report going back to the addition there was comment about the was described as a shed roof um between the two masses and that was they asked that that be removed as a condition for approval and for me I I really like that roof I think it helps soften the height of the addition and sort of connect those two Tower elements together could you turn to that page yes I can he says yeah I assume so just turn it off again there we go uh so this is the U shed roof as described in the report and I think if it was not there you would really read the height of that parit as being quite um a butting there or you know quite intrusive so I felt like the uh by joining it with a small roof it would lessen the feel that these are two towers attached to the back of the house and more that it was one elevation you have a section of that in one of the drawings I think you did I do there it is so um so this is the uh covered Terrace on the ground floor uh the this is the roof of the tower left and right and then in between that is a is a lower roof with projecting uh Rafters underneath and tongue and grp ceiling so it'll be a um a detailed piece not just a a you know a plain element can you go back to the elevation um welcome any questions I can you do you have access to the photographs that are in our report I have access to the pH uh the ones yes so in ours for for us the photographs on page three of the photographs that are in whatever they're called is that something that we can pull up Cara on the staff report or on the submitted 1409 alhamra photos I do not have those um oh I might have submitted that as a separate file yeah so on the third page for the board members that's the photograph of the back of the oh right exactly yeah of the the building third page mhm yeah is that in the report no it's this is like right along the line so you can sort of see on I think it's this photo here it's similar to the the the second on the left this one up up one that one similar to that one but right up close so again the images that we have on page three of the photos show kind of a direct view of the distance of the neighboring home and the Hedge and the the back of the the carriage house and it's a really good photograph which is why I just wanted all of us to make sure that we saw it um that's a little bit better than yours on the screen um I did jump in with questions but does anybody from the board have questions for the architector staff additional questions actually that was my question how close the neighbor's house was to it because it seems in I don't think I have that photograph so there is an overbite between the the two properties the in that photograph the uh property to the rear um does project beyond the line of the of the garage um but that house is at a at an an acute angle I think the street behind it is curved perhaps or I guess a hamur is curved so it it isn't um a direct uh parallel and so uh and again the as you look into the the picture with the tree that's the the corner of the of the house which is is here and and sort of opens up as it goes away so it's it's as near to the back corner of that property as it could be do you have the site plan or the survey cuz I think the survey shows the fence line and it could probably I do have a survey yes yeah says it's 5'8 I think so the there is a little more room to the East and that would be sort of further way so we could make you know Endeavor to put all the equipment to the east of that um little back area oh I see what you're talking about you see how in the in the location plan you can you can see how um how small the or you know so that house is sort of in the deeper part of that lot rather than the narrow part yeah the other house has no backyard whatsoever no it's no the other house has a is built to a a minimum 5ot set back and then sort of angles out I think it's um more parallel to the street than it is the rear property line Mr nhft I wanted to get uh staff's clarification because I I read with importance the fact that within three feet of the property line those auxiliary uh units were going to be placed and staff stressed that immediately adjacent on the other side is not garage space but it's a living space of the other home so the house of kites I don't know if you guys are familiar with it or not it's the big twostory yellow house and it sits it sits a skew on the property line and as mix Maxwell was correct you walk out the living room doors and you at the back property line there's no backyard so that was that was the concern that by pushing units close to that property line that you're you know really close to the the house you're not you're not at you know 15 20 ft from a from a living space and then currently we have a rear wall property line wall and uh the owner would be ad meable if we needed to extend that you know to help with a bit of sight and noise it's masonry right rently me putting it that close I would be more comfortable if it were garage space not living room or you know dining room you know active living living space in the adjacent home so it gives me some pause and I I I was thinking if you did bring it into farther forward into that alternative area on your your client's property where it it's yard even if you brought it Forward there you at least could hide it with with nicely placed vegetation or hedge or something around it so I mean yes the the corner of the house which is visible there is a a room it's not um storage you know it's it is it would be effectively to the side of that it but if you brought it on your client's Pro property to the alternative site that you you mentioned which was farther forward in in in the large area on the right hand side that was when you're facing the front of the house and looking toward the rear there was there was be the least I mean it would would still require variance it would be next to the neighbor but it would also be the most visually detrimental place for it I understand but you could hide that behind plantings in vegetation I would I would suggest Mr Gibb can you go before you go Mike um sheet 810 and for those of us that have sheet 810 it's got the aerial photograph on the bottom right hand corner we can zoom in and you can see specifically where things are you can't see it where you're going to show it Caleb but we can see it here oh and you're on St presentation no on on yeah A10 we can zoom into the aial so people can see it a little bit more closely the on yeah yes you can see the the detached white square and then the you should be a you should see the roof of the of the oh sorry yeah we can but if you move it where you were talking about wouldn't it be just as CL I'm sorry Mr Maxwell that's okay um just just a the mechanical equipment is the mechanical equipment for the garage or is it for no there's a there's an it's a process thing but there's a the existing permit uh for the renovation of the house the last remaining thing is the location of the AC equipment for the garage so we've put that in the uh the goal that being the least um uh area that would require discussion um so it it it seems to be the best place for a piece of equipment uh so that's in its own right one variance then the new work includes relocating to existing units and the pool equipment so that would into the re could they I mean you what you've done is a really elegant solution I really very much like this so me thank you good architecture is there a possibility you could put these on the roof the roofs are flat I understand they are um buts all the sound upward rather than yes uh but there is a requirement to have the you know you would have to have the parit at least as tall as the uh so then you get into a uh problematic that way plus um with the desire not for them to blow away you tend to have to reinforce the interior structure the existing uh historic uh sort of handf framed wood structure probably would need some reinforcing which would so like a strapping or something like that right uh I mean yes it would need strapping but also maybe even vertical supports below Miss Spain then Mr Miss Rando I was just is saying that if you move it into the location that you were Bruce talking about which can't be in the driveway would have to be forward of the driveway and that would bring it I think almost as close to the neighboring house on that side yes unfortunately that's very close in this area I don't know yes I think all the lots are are not orthagonal so there's always a corner of a house you moved it there would that also require a variance because that's the overall setback correct yep and we we talked about putting it on the west side of the house cuz that that neighbor is set back quite far to the West on the AJ but that would need a variance too at least for the relocated equipment it would need overall and possibly like a 6in variance to be at 5 ft it's I mean it's a the addition is beautiful the house is beautiful it's a I get the problem so so the the goal is you know we have a I guess uh factors not caused by the owner or you know obviously the house was not designed with AC and it's rear Courtyard is not conducive to have a a mechanical plant in the middle of it so Mr orando then Mr yis when given the choice of accommodating a less desirable use on the property versus putting it closer to the neighbor and where the neighbor has very little uh distance I think the owner should accommodate that use rather than inflicting it on the neighbor I um I love what she've done I think it's extraordinary but I don't think that we should be giving a variance um that when there are other Alternatives so there wasn't a question Mr Gillis okay on the slide that you're currently on the photo that says Back Garden uh it's kind of in the middle on the left okay the stairs going up to the second story of The Carriage House what why can't it go to the right of those stairs what are you doing there the right of the stairs um yeah if I go to the site plan uh there isn't anything that would prohibit them around it no uh it's it would be but um it would be in their backyard it's not a we're the the house although impressive actually uh takes up most of the lot so that you know we're we're sort of fighting against ourselves on that but it it isn't it isn't a um we would we're proposing or we're requesting that one AC unit go to the left of the stairs um but perhaps the beauty of the stair would be diminished yeah but that house behind it I mean I don't not an expert on that house I've been by it several times though that's also a beautiful home and they have the unique characteristic that they're so close to the back property line so for the reasons the other board memb stated I don't see how that would be fair to oh you know we try to help you we try to help the historic homeowners that have this problem but at the same time if you're hurting somebody else then that's becomes a problem because then what is their solution to that noise they don't really have a way you're going to knock down part of another 1920s home so thank well um I I don't well that wasn't a question yeah so let's try to keep it to questions for staff we can have discussion after so initial his question Mr Silva had a question then Mr eron have thank you U just two questions one of semantics right the the zoning code says the historic board may allow a rear setback of 5T that I assume that still qualifies as a variance um yes but it's it's it's a doable it's kind of in there if there's context yes we can give that but it's yes okay but it's still it's still a variance like the zoning code rules it as a variance see as a variance I believe so it at for at some point Board of Architects could do that administratively and then they took that away so they can still recommend it say yeah we think it should be 5T and we can say we think it should be 5T so that's good enough you don't need a hardship does that make sense yes and and my second question is that language does not exist for side setbacks no only rear yeah okay thank you Mr AR half sorry I just wanted to re-clarify it's not just that HVAC is going to be put there but all of the pool equipment as well so you've got two sets of infrastructure is that correct that is correct yes thank you and pool equipment has now been granted a 5 foot setback right it's not without a variance I I have one more question yes you didn't happen to talk to the neighbors did you that's my suggestion maybe H they may say you know we never go out there because we've got like 2 feet of of uh uh grass out there um absolutely we don't have a problem and we'll make and we'll put in writing that's because I would be shocked if they used that backyard I mean it's one thing if they're out there lounging around a pool and you got the stuff going but if they're inside an air conditioned home and they you know they're not going to be able to hear anything I don't have an issue with it but I would be shocked if they did I would suggest just talking to them but thank you thank you Mr Gibb um if there are no more questions we'll take it to public hearing and then bring it back thank you very much um opening to public hearing does actually I forgot to ask and does anybody have any exart Communications they wish to share at this time no opening to public hearing does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor of this case anybody on Zoom anybody in the a to speak in opposition anyone on Zoom okay closing the public here and bringing it back to the board for discussion I would I'd like to also add something you know there are criteria for a um for an variance and I'm looking at the staff report and they go through the different ones so a lot of it we also don't have an option on you know for instance one of them is the that the special conditions and C circumstances do not result from the ACT of the applicant they're the ones wanting to move the AC unit or pool equipment so how can you say that that wouldn't be as a result of the actions of the applicant that's just one example I think there's 1 two 3 four five six of them know sometimes there's a case where there's one or two that are borderline but when you have a case like this where there are so many and Donna to take a different perspective from what you said just because the current owner next door doesn't have a problem doesn't mean you know that house could be around another couple hundred years they're going to be i' I've walked in areas like this where you're between two walls of concrete with this mechanical equipment and it's just bouncing off the walls so if I may this is something we've asked staff before number two um staff is the one who said yes is there a reason why the special conditions circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant so that criteria um we look at it sometimes as in the place of an existing building so the existing nonconformity that is there so like for the first variance the building is at 6 ft not 10 ft so we're allowing them to continue the line of that non-conformity to put the new equipment behind the stairs so that's why that one applies in that case there's there's Ways to Think Through it as we try to identify the criteria um in terms of like for example an overall side setback if you you were to look at this property the garage is set 2 ft from the right side setback which would require a much larger than normal setback on the left side so we would be willing to give a variance for a side setback at 5 ft because that's normal even though it doesn't meet the overall because there's an existing building that intrudes does that make sense there's there's ways to look at the way the buildings are placed on the lot to justify a variance thank you Mr Silva um sure um just I I think you did a great job on the addition on the building um I think we kind of all agree I think we're all stuck on on on the variances um I I personally don't have an issue with the the shed roof um I think it differentiates it as an addition um which which I think is is important uh I also appreciate the extra band you did on that railing to differentiate it as that's kind of a different thing coming across um I don't have an issue with the variants that staff is recommending approval on um I think that that's a reasonable condition um but and I know I would even be kind of open-minded if if we were to look at Donna's suggestion of maybe getting Buy in from all the neighbors um for all those other setbacks but as it stands now those two setbacks are difficult to approve because are other locations on site um and and and if if I was forced to pick and choose um I would you know maybe look at doing something on on the west side we have to Grant the variance anyway I think that's a more reasonable uh location on the west side of the house um and you can get to a kind of a 5 foot setback there which is which is more reasonable in 2 foot6 I think that that 2 foot6 is is a tough sell thank you Mr Silva okay if there's no further discussion is there a motion or series of motions actually before we do that I I do want I I do have a comment on number one with the shed roof on the North facade I can see staff's point it's it seems uh perhaps a little heavy but I do also see the need for the connection between the two towers um whoever makes the motion um maybe there is a condition instead of remove it's continue to coordinate with staff or or remove it completely remember that's up to however you want to make the motion um again if there's does anybody want to make a motion or series of motions and we're going to take them all separately can um we just clarify one thing so if um if there's the possibility that you all want the applicant to reach out to the neighbor and get some sort of Buy in on the location of that if that's will change your opinion um then then those need to get removed from the approval from the site plan yeah so whatever you approve in the site plan today approval or denial um if it's approval with the conditions above there may need to be an added condition that the mechanical equipment as indicated on the site plan is or is not approved depending on the variances so I just want to be clear if you approve a site plan that contains the mechanical equipment in one place place and then later deny the um variants that's a little contradictory because you've approved them in the site plan so just to keep that in mind when you're looking at the approval of the design proposal and site workor because the design proposal and site work does contain the location of that mechanical equipment so I don't know if you want to take them in a different order I don't know if you want to just fer some of the variances but just to keep that in mind that whatever motion um should be clear about the contents of the design proposal so the variances should go first I I appreciate that actually let's if that's okay with the board members let's do it in the reverse order from the bottom up so if anybody wishes to make a motion um and they don't mind starting with the last motion first that would be helpful M Rando I move to defer um the motion to deny a re variance to allow for the pool equipment to have a rear setback of approximately 4 2 in so question to defer to allow them to come back yes yeah for sure I just have a I would be um actually before we second the motion um City attorney do we need to defer or do we need to no certainly not if there's a reason for the deferral such as reaching out to neighbors or looking at other locations that would be the reason to do so but you may certainly you know I'm sorry do do we need to vote to defer it or can it just not be considered I would ask that either the the property owners representative asked for them to be differred or you all take action in some way because it's been presented to you here before and we've had a public hearing about it already thank you Miss thank you Mr Orlando is there a second to that motion uh I I'll second it but should it be deferred or continued yeah either way I understand the sentiment so there's um a deferral there's a motion to defer the third notice um variance by Miss Rolando and seconded by Miss Spain now we're open for discussion Mr chair if I can just note that this would be deferred to a date certain so we don't need to Ren notice it will be Contin to the next meeting understood thank you Miss da did you have some discussion on this item um yes I guess in followup to Mr gillis's comments I I do have an issue with moving forward and different neighbors and also have an issue with the noise factor with the AC so I would prefer to just vote on um the denial right now and prefer not to defer to potential neighbors weighing in on this particular issue thank you Mr Na and that is our right we can vote on the deferral Mr Gillis okay so I I appreciate what you're trying to do but I'm looking at the Criterion number five that the variance granted is the minimum will make possible the reasonable use of the land building or structure so we're here to help people I want to help people enjoy their historic homes and everything but we've identified several other possibilities that they could use this would not be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of landb building or structure and I'm concerned that years down the line that people are going to say this equipment is just too loud it's un uninhabitable to you know you have healthcare workers like I know some that work sleep during the day in the summer those units can be on all day so that's my impression but I I totally understand what you're trying to do and I think it's a good faith thank you Mr GIS any further disc I have no problem with drawing it and voting the um just voting up or down the denial if if that's the consensus of my esteemed colleagues so we can either take a vote or you can withdraw it I'll withdraw it um does the second have to also approve the withdrawal that's fine okay so the motion to defer has been withdrawn uh we have no motions does anybody wish to make a motion at this time I'd like to make the motion Miss D I'd like to make a motion to deny the variance to allow the proposed pool equipment to have the rear setback of 4et 2 in the minimum um rear setback under the code should be of 5 ft as required by article 3 section 3 3 -308 D2 of the zoning code and I'd like to um follow that up with this is a staff recommendation that's a motion by Mr is there a second second second by Miss Rolando can we call the role Please Mr arft yes Mr Gillis yes Mr Silva yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Spain no Miss D yes Miss Rando yes Mr Garcia Pon yes the motion to deny passes 7 to one miss da would you like to make another motion um yes I'd like to make a motion to deny the variance to allow the reload uh relocated mechanical equipment to have a rear setback of approximately 2' 6 in versus the minimum re rear set setback which under Article 2 Section 2-101 D4 of the coral cable Sony code is 10 ft uh is there a second Mr second and Mr Maxwell can we have Mr or Lando do that oh of course Mr R we' like to second that motion yes there's a motion and a second can we call the role Please Mr nhft yes Mr Gillis yes Mr Silva yes Miss ban no Miss Rando yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Den yes Mr Garcia p yes the motion to deny passes 7 to one Miss D would you like to make another motion this might be a little more complicated you can help me out I like to make the a motion to approve the variance to allow the proposed uh mechanical equipment for the auxiliary structure to have a rear setback of 6 Fe 6 in is there is there an extra condition I should be placing on that no that's just the variance for the one mechanical equipment for the auxiliary building it's a discret item okay it is just for clarification this is the equipment that is uh proposed to be located to the immediate left of the staircase it is um is your motion complete Mr n yes is there a second second second by Mr orando can we call the RO Mr haft yes Mr Mr Gillis yes Mr Silva yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Spain yes Miss da yes Miss Rando yes Mr Garcia Pon yes motion to approve passes 8 to Z and is there a final motion for the the two items remaining Mr Sila just a clarification or question really before anyone makes a motion here so obviously we're going to ask them to take a look at at the at the mechanical units right so that needs to be incorporated into the motion um are we going to allow them the flexibility to work within that 6'6 line now for the for the other uh mechanical units cuz if if we are we should probably let them know now or or let them know that it's not acceptable and they got to comply with with all the requirements so the 10t setback is applicable to to the uh AC equipment there's a they've just changed the zoning code recently 5 ft is for the pool equipment so if you keep that 6 foot um that's a variance that's consistent with what you just granted the six because there's still one mechanical unit two mechanical that's right that we need to to find a home for the pool won't need one if they're within that six feet thank you so this one's a trickier motion does anybody wish to make this motion okay I could do that Mr Gillis go ahead okay i' make a motion to approve with the conditions noted in the staff report 2 3 4 5 6 7 and 8 so not including the removal of the shed roof at the North facade for the scope of work and approve the design Proposal with the considerations we talked about with the mechanical equipment um for the ition of the residents and site work on the property located at 1409 alhamra Circle and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness with the conditions we spoke about before there's a second is that is that sufficient is does anybody Madam City attorney just to clarify your motion Mr Gillis to approve approve conditions 2 through 8 um and Grant the certificate of appropriateness with a condition with the consideration that the mechanical the location of the mechanical equipments that were denied in the first two votes shall not be part of the approval correct does Mr Silva had a question do you want to say anything in addition to that if you would accept a a friendly Amendment or maybe amend your motion to give them direction as to whether those units are going to be allowed within a 6'6 um line from the rear property correct so to include the ability to to have the mechanical equipment within the is it 6 6' 6 in so would it be to Grant a variance for the location of those within the 6'6 setback no they need to come back with a plan as to where it's going to go and work it out with staff for a recommendation so it wouldn't be then you're prejudicing your future vote I don't think we should pre-approve anything they should come back with a plan as to what needs to be done then I then I would just suggest that the motion as you made it is sufficient and they've taken D they can hear the direction from the commission today and staff can as always work with any applicant to work on another application for variance if if they so choose to come forward with another okay variance application but rather than giving them specific insight into your future voting we should um let them decide to submit or Not Another variance application Mr Silva is it is it your consideration to see if there's something that we can vote on today I I just I would like to avoid them having to come back again I I think we should either tell them that 6'6 is is is going to be permitted or it's not going to be permitted Madam City attorney can we Madam City attorney she's thinking can I'm sorry what what was the question Mr Silva can there can the board without drawings showing the location of the mechanical equip equipment give a distance as part of our motion assuming that the this the variances that were noticed which were people were given proper notice are larger than what is proposed here I think it would likely be sufficient I would suggest that they need to be demonstrated on the plans where they would be not just a general setback because people may have stronger opinions if it's further east further west Etc so while I understand the sentiment unless the the um applicant has proposal he'd like to show today showing where those are or defer consideration of this item to another meeting um I I would suggest not granting a sort of blank check um thank you City attorney um there's a motion is there a second to that motion I'll second it does anybody have a friendly amendment to request okay we have a motion in a second call the um can we clarify the motion please so just to repeat the motion as I have it that it's a motion to approve with conditions 2 through 8 and um not granting any of the um mechanical equipment variances that were in the um first and second votes taken today about the RE 2 fo 6 in and 4 foot2 setbacks those that equipment is not included as part of the approval and the issuance of a COA thank you madam City attorney can we call the role Mr Arin haft yes Miss da yes Miss Rando yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Spain yes Mr Gillis yes Mr Silva yes and Mr Garcia Pon uh yes motion passes 8 to zero thank you everybody that was a great way to resolve that one thank you um thank you Mr Gibb yes the last we approved it yes it was approval with the conditions 2 through eight so not the condition for the shed roof and the mechanical equipment variances for the 2 6 in and 42 in are not included in the approval but the 6' 6 in um variance that was approved is included in the site plan approval and the shed plan's okay to stay who was the second on motion with Mr Silva thank you um next case case File COA 20246 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 1316 alhamra Circle a contributing resource within the alhamra circle historic district legal legally described as Lots 99 and 10 block 15 cable section e according to the plat thereof as recorded in plap book 8 page 13 of the public records of M County Florida the application requests design approval to replace the original front door of the residents um at this time does anybody have any expar Communications on this item no madame Kow sorry if you can put the PowerPoint back up please thank you so this is make sure that's right it's a location map of the property uh it is on Al Hamber Circle also a contributing resource designated in 2008 uh it was built Circ 1924 permit number 1193 in the city designed by the team of Frank Wy woods and John Tracy uh the applicant is requesting design approval for the replacement of the original front door uh entry door The Proposal seeks to replace the existing door with aluminum impact resistant door um staff is recommending denial of the application um when we point to Secretary of the Interior standards number six which is featur shall be repaired rather than replaced um we had a site visit and did not note severe deterioration of this door which we believe is the only original remaining um door feature still remaining on this house so this is these are pictures of the door in question that's that's all we have thank you so um there should be another PowerPoint yeah there should there go hi everyone uh my name is Kevin I work with the contracted company that is uh contracted to replace the front door or propose to replace the front door um this is the as shown before the original door now there is some um history of faulty Hardware uh the door has had Hardware attempts to fix the hardware um and as you can see around the handle there's um starting to see some rot on the actual door uh the homeowner has attempted to reach out to blocksmith companies to have uh some of that stuff replaced um but they can't guarantee you know uh restoration of the door and for it to still be um structurally sound now it was recommended by the um hisor staff that we would install shutters to uh impact the door now the only issue with that is is on the previous slide if you can tell the there's a wall protruding directly on the excuse me the right side of the door and a light fixture fixed on the left side so to have panels and rails to be fitted to slide in the panels uh light fixture would obstruct now there is the possibility I guess I guess you can say of accordion shutters um however I think you guys might agree that that's quite the I isore from a street point of view now we recognize that we door is in historic property and we made attempts with manufacturers to uh try to replicate the door as best as possible um while still providing hosi Hurricane's own protection um as well as the aesthetic of the door so you can see here we have a cad drawing of the um orientation of the door configuration as well as the um the wood grain sample that the door would have there any questions question please please Mr Gillis did you do you have a side by side of the existing and proposed door are they basically identical or what are the what are the differences so the um the only differen is in the door um if you can um how I so the only differen is in the door and it's cly how the door is manufactured is um you'll have this uh excuse me this these paneling that that'll go around whereas on the original door it's it's just the the vertical slides um now it's not to say that I guess the the same profile is in a way but not significantly significantly created with the frame of the door that's existing but um yeah as mentioned the the paneling will be there to try to resemble the door as best as possible and it's aluminum it is Aluminum and it's outswinging it will be outswinging so any water infiltration uh code would be met just code yeah I I really miss my ins swinging door when I lived in a historic home I thought it was so much more elegant uh and now all of the uh hurricane uh requirements they're all outswinging and I now live in a new townhouse and I have an Out Swinging Door which I am not fond of I'm just putting that in any questions for staff hurricane fabric is that not possible I see hurricane fabric being used more um that could be an option um however there's still the issue with as far as uh the owner attempts at trying to have Hardware fixed for the door um there is a concern for the safety of the individuals in the home for the homeowner they they have children that live there as well um and they do have a concern of and not that cor G you know a bad neighborhood by any stretch of the imagination but um that that is that does weigh on the Homeowner's uh conscience just so you know I had I have a close friend who has a door very similar to this been through Hurricane Andrew she had a home invasion they didn't come in that way I mean this is these doors I don't know about this particular one but I can tell you the ones I've seen I wish that I had an original Coral Gables door I really do so thank you is there um the ability to create a composite door something that maybe the front of it is has wood to mimic and somehow applied to another door other than straight manufactured out of aluminum with as far as the manufacturer for the door that that was provided on the contract um they don't provide something like that um they do have that wood grain finish it's not a wood texture per se it it does have it's not necessarily smooth like a a standard panel door would be um by you Mr ER haft um I don't have a question I had a comment so I was well we we're going to have discussion if it's if if there's any questions for the owner the staff if not I'll take it to public hearing and then bring it back I had a question for staff um would they be permitted to just paint this door like a wood grain color would they be permitted to do that I don't think that's no but what I'm trying to make the analogy to when you have an unpainted finish we want to retain the unpainted finish yes where I'm going is if we're looking at it visually and we're trying to compare to the proposed material which is this aluminum look which obviously looks much cleaner and it's a little more uniform if they were permitted to paint the door then technically speaking I wouldn't see much of a distinction between that and perhaps the proposed safer product so you have the right to paint a door with permission for the paint color ma'am ma'am if you're going to speak into the microphone and were you sworn in at the beginning of the she was yes sir I was I see your point pleas sorry I'm Elizabeth Timberlake Homeowner of 1316 I see your point that if we painted it it would give it the same look so if that's a concern that this won't look true wood grain if we're allowed to paint the door as is it would end up giving it a very similar appearance to the aluminum door that we're trying to get although the point of it is for impact purposes if I'm correct and what you're yes in fact I was trying to give you a friendly question because that would be um your point is you would want to put in this door which we might feel is um makes a visual difference to the effect of adversely impacting the historical feel but if the reality is that this your proposal can be similar to something you as a homeowner would do anyway then maybe that would somewhat favor your position just as a point of um conversation thank you Mr na any questions for staff for the owner okay another question for staff with the garage doors and front doors if they replace it don't they have to do the have it to match the existing the one that they're proposing isn't matching from what I'm seeing you mentioned it I mean I'm looking at it this one is vertical boards going straight up and down it doesn't have the and then I'm looking at the the image on the screen it has it's horizontal at the top and bottom and that kind of maybe ineter it has a anel of some sort um I'm sorry Center of of where exactly on where the glass picture on the IM on that image that you're showing right now all of the boards are vertical there's no horizontal element to it other than the glass portion or plastic portion on the proposed you have at the top and the bottom forget if it's Styles or rails I used to know the name can't remember anymore they're going horizontal on the top and bottom that's the construction of the two different door constructions completely not let the door expert yeah exactly that um essentially the there's a larger glass panel that's uh is held within that that uh horizontal members that you you were pointing out could I perhaps answer that since I took the measurements for the door what you're looking look at there and Kevin please correct me if I'm wrong that's the frame for the door so it's going to be bigger and actually fill the space which they say is supposed to be safer for impact purposes but I literally took a measuring tape and said let's replicate it to a T and we measure it from top to bottom so the impact glass will be exactly where the current glass is the width of the lines that will be imitated will I mean down to te it matches the current door door is just going to be Impact versus non-impact and so I'm sure that wasn't what Mr Gillis was saying and Kevin mentioned it earlier the door construction is a box that has a fill and the top and bottom are just part of the way the doors are constructed my question or maybe perhaps Mr gillis's question is is there a way to reduce the visual impact of the top and bottom rail of the door um we we we could could try to reach out to manufacturer to see if they have a a smaller style option um but as far as far as at least to my knowledge um this is what they had come up with um yeah there are companies that are doing it on the corner of Obispo and Ferdinand very elegant one was done not too many years ago um okay let's again any questions for staff or the architect if not that will'll take it to public hearing and then come back thank you both um let me open the conversation of public hearing does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor of this case anybody in opposition okay hearing none we're closing public hearing bringing it back to the board for discussion Andor motion so I I just want to kind of explore this concept because I am somewhat disturbed by the boxing look mhm um that didn't catch me at first in the drawing so I do find a concern with that it makes it it makes it different if the board's willing to approve it if it were a basically a replication but in an impact form could we continue it to the next meeting to give them time to reach out to the Manu ufacturer or potentially another manufacturer to see if that's possible the issue that I come from is we allow people to replace their Windows frequently some of the windows are quite elaborate in Coral Gables so to allow Windows and not allow doors it's kind of in congruent philosophy there I personally would try to save this door but at the same time I see the philosophy if we allow Windows to be replaced how do we deny a door to be changed you could certainly defer this item and and um I think the applicant will have receive the feedback from you all to see if there's a different design proposal they want to bring back okay I would make the motion to refer to the March meeting to give the applicant an opportunity to reach out to their current manufacturer potentially identify a new one that could replicate the existing door and if you send them pictures of what's currently existing just could ask them if they'd be willing to make you a replica of it but in an impact form be before there's a second um can we check with the owner to see if they're interested in a deferral or would they like us to vote up or down today and if you have a if you speak into the microphone I'd appreciate it sorry I'm just confused because we sent a picture of the door and said replicate it exact L right but I think you are seeing something I don't see that it's not an exact replica and maybe that's due to impact standards that something might have changed what the board is saying ma'am at this point is you either have an option of accepting an up or down vote today or sending it back to the manufacturer and saying it must look more like the original the issue that we've heard twice is that there's a horizontal member on top and on bottom currently it's just all vertical lines and that's something that you're the your your door manufacturer should understand but you may have already done that which is why I'm asking you if you want the opportunity or not hold on Bruce oh no then we'd like the opportunity so what y'all don't like is the frame around it and you would like it to match and see if impact standards will allow that to where it's at door without the different shape lines going around yeah then we'd be happy to try to do that thank you okay Mr Gillis thank you is there a second yes I'd like to second that there's a second by Mr name Mr Arin half did you have no it's no cuz you're into the motion already I had other comments so we can I wanted to clarify that doors of that period have vertical joined boards that are very heavy and they have nothing on the top and they they go from filling the entire space top to bottom there's no that door has a frame at the bottom a frame on the two sides and a frame at the top and the normal door the original door has pieces of wood that are parallel from the top of the door to the base I was this is outside of the the box but I was going to ask a question about why do they not consider getting an accordion which they can remove a simple accordion for a door like that can be installed in in an hour and a half or two and and it will protect the unit during the storm thank you Mr half and they did Express an opinion on that we have a motion um by Mr Gillis a second by Mr to continue the item to the next meeting can we call the RO please okay Miss Miss ban no Mr Maxwell yes I'll defer Mr Rando yes Mr Silva yes Mr Aron haft yes Miss D yes Mr Gillis yes and Mr Garcia Pon yes motion to continue has is approved 7 to one um thank you and the last item um case File COA SP 223-2900 4.6 A3 of the Carl Gable zoning code historic preservation board's review and approval of the proposed development located at 21 6 and 224 Catalonia Avenue 3,000 ponon Boulevard 203 University Drive and 225 Malaga Avenue described legally described as Lots 8 through 20 BL 29 Carl Gables Craft section according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 10 at page 40 of the public records of M County Florida as a transfer of development receiving site is required to determine if the proposal adversely affects the historic architectural or aesthetic character of the historic properties the following historically designated properties are within 500 ft of the proposed development the historic whiteway lights a local Historic Landmark located on Riviera Drive between Anastasia Avenue and University Drive and on University Drive between Bird Road and ponen Boulevard 2901 Pon Stan Boulevard legally described as track D Plaza Carl Gables according to the plat thereof as recorded in plot book 173 page 078 of the public record of M day County Florida and 247 Malaga Avenue legally described as Lots 26 and 27 block 29 Carl Gable crafts section according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 10 page 40 of the public record of Mi County Florida um I have before we get started I have a question for the City attorney is this denovo or does this continue from the last meeting so this is a discret item that was proposed we had a public hearing last time I would suggest if you would like to open the public hearing and hear new presentations it's my understanding that there was a change in the staff report and a change in the proposal so I would suggest that it be essentially a denovo hearing because I think what's before you today is a different item than was proposed last time thank you so for the board members even if you said it at the last meeting if there are any changes make sure to reiterate things for this particular meeting um also prior to hearing it does anybody have any expar communication regarding this item that they wish to share at this time Miss Peres um and just to clarify for today the continuance was for the um historic preservation board's review and approval of the proposed development um required to determine if the proposal adversely affects the historic architectural or or aesthetic character of the historic properties located at uh within 500 ft of the pro po development the historic whiteway light 2901 ponon Boulevard and 247 Malaga Avenue um at the last hearing just to clarify the Motions that were made for the city plan amendments um a motion was to deny the request for the recommendation of the approval of the city commission for the amendment to the city plan to vacate the alley was um made and also a motion to approve the recommendation for approval to the city commission for the amendment of the city plan for the partial abandonment and vacation of the segment of University Drive a motion to determine the proposal does adversely affect the historic and Architectural and aesthetic character of the historic properties located within 500 ft failed to achieve a majority vote resulting in the automatic continuance of this prop of this request to today's hearing um in staff's observations the proposed development does not before so is everyone clear as to the one thing that we're hearing today just one no can you repeat that that was not here sure okay I watched it but still that for me so I'll from the do you want me to summarize Anna yes today we're here reviewing the application for a receiving site as for tdrs yeah and it's adverse effect to the historic properties within 500 ft and only that item the other two have vot been voted on the report said that there was a an ER with where the whiteway light was so that's where we're going now okay that's the part so within the so since the last meeting the applicant has revised their submitt um and staff has observed that the pro development does not adversely affect the three historically designated properties within 500 ft the existing whiteway light that um exists on site uh will not be relocated and is not in conflict with the proposal and will remain in its original location so staff is recommending ing that the proposal does not adversely affect the historic architectural or aesthetic character of the historic properties located within 500 ft and to approve the proposed The Proposal referred to um Pon Park residences I got that got it everyone's clear um does the owner wish to present or make a comment good afternoon uh Mr chair members of the board for the record Javier Fernandez office at 2011 alhur Circle Suite 1205 I will be exceedingly brief as I try to be the last time and just get to the gist of um today's issue if you can share our presentation please oh clicker thank you sorry okay I'm going to just go through a couple slides one um I think we're all aware of the posture of the item that was clarified briefly in 2022 a similar request was considered by this board I just want to note for the record it was approved by a vote of 6 to Zer the only difference between that request and the current one was the architectural style of the building um last time we were before you unfortunately when the location of the white way light was cited on our plans it was identified I believe I'm sorry Mr Fernandes can you go back to that that you just mentioned at the last vote Yes so in 2022 this board considered a similar request to approve this is a receiving site uh that portion of the request was approved by this board unanimously because it was determined there would be no adverse impact to the white way light so that portion that portion not the vacation that's not what this clearly says I'm sorry I wanted to it say we're only dealing with this item I didn't realize I needed to clarify but thank you for that clarification Mr chairman you will recall during our last discussion which unfortunately was prolonged because of our error and I apologize for that um we had indicated the white way lot we thought would be located in conflict with the EG store and the loading dock um because of that PR vote when I reviewed the record that evening it caused me a great deal of consternation uh I realized that the J the dimensions of the J&J design building which is at the East westernmost por of our property is in excess of 50 ft the dimension for this loading area is about 40 ft and if you look at where the white way light is on the map it's actually somewhere in this area and so I'll try to show you with some images how we came to the conclusion that it was improperly cited and we have a slide that kind of overlays the current design with a survey just to confirm that it's now in the right posture so quickly again this is our uh ground floor plan this is the location of the whiteway light you see there's not the conflict that we thought there was before overlaying it with the survey again here approximately is the location of the whiteway light and then to give you we asked our design team given the prior to prepare some uh design renderings to kind of show you in context this is the current condition right you see the the building very close the whiteway light same perspective this would be the relationship between the building and the white way light from another angle looking north and east again roughly the same context same direction and then from a frontal view this is where it's located and this is where roughly it would be within the proposed landscape so we hope with this additional information you could recommend approval of this as we do believe and concur with staff's finding that there will be no adverse impact on that Historic Landmark if you have any questions happy to address them just just to confirm so under your plan there's going to be a greater distance from the building to the white way light yes ma'am which uh to me would create a better focus for the light so you have a greater distance now than exists in the current yes I think it's structure I think without again I'm not a photometric expert but I think it'll do a better job of lighting the sidewalk and also it'll prove the relationship between the light and the building than the current condition okay thank you thank you thank you Mr D any questions for Mr Gill okay 247 Malaga Avenue your proposed development will it cast a shadow over that building I I do not believe we it will but I I would defer to staff and you know I don't want to provide any sort of expert testimony on that point I think I think the report does not indicate that it would have any adverse impact is the best I can answer that question Mr Fernandez do you have an aerial or site plan or in your presentation uh I do not believe we do in this one since we condensed it just to deal with this one issue um maybe here we go yeah this I'm trying to figure out exactly which is 247 I don't know if Miss peris can help me identify it here um I believe it's roughly in this area but uh I don't want to misspeak um so again I don't want to misrepresent that is a faxer so Mr the sun rises on the East and sets in the west so I believe in the morning it would cast a shadow on that building so how does that not impact the aesthetic character of that historic resource the only thing I can offer by way of a comment uh informed comment on that sir is to say that the prior iteration that of this project that was approved in 2022 was for a much taller structure this is a substantially shorter building and that's the only thing I could offer by way of a a response to your to your question okay any Mr Silva I have a question for for staff I guess for Mr Ro it's so at the last meeting we we denied we recommended denials to the commission for the vacation of the alley right so if this project if the commission chooses to uphold that recommendation this project is is denied I I believe Mr Fernandez has um lots of unanswered questions yet before this project can go forward there's multiple things that need to go to the city commission um for final approval correct so yes and and my question then is if we if we approve this discret item the tdrs do they live with the site they live with this proposal so that's why this is coming back a second time and didn't just get to proceed with that previous approval in 2021 because the if the proposal changes and I would say significantly it have to look at the code but then it would have to come back as another receiving site approval so it's this iteration of this proposal which is why it's here again thank you question for staff Mr Gillis the plaza development that received transfer development rights next to the Arts Center that huge development I'm not familiar I don't I'm not sure miss counts what did she say I'm sorry I didn't hear what no she she's not oh she also doesn't know he's talking about the plaza Development Across The Street how did that happen wait so Mr Gillis that's not what hearing is for Mr Gillis let's ask about this particular project the reason that I wouldn't want to unfairly harm this development because that's a much larger development and that art center is one of our most significant historic resources so if we're saying that didn't impact the impact the aesthetic character of the Arts Center I don't know how I could say that this building is going to impact 247 Malaga so I'm trying to help the applicant it is our charge to look at every case individually yeah okay if there are no further questions for staff for the um owner I'll open to public comment thank you for your consideration thank you you um let's open up the public comment anybody here to speak in support in favor of this case anybody wishes to speak in opposition hearing none we're going to close public hearing and bring it back to the board for our discussion my only concern last time was a moving of the whiteway light the fact that they're leaving it there I'm comfortable uh with The Proposal thank you m and just for the record all the public comment that we received was circulated to you all this morning yes thank you Miss beras and I I I do like the fact that I believe the beauty of the light is really shining so I greatly appreciate that I think they should put a plaque next to [Music] it all right is there any interest in making a motion I make a motion uh I make a a motion that we've determined that the proposal does not adversely affect the historic architectural or aesthetic character of the historic properties located within 500 ft of the site namely the white we street lights a local Historic Landmark and the others that we've already been mentioned which aren't mentioned here and to approve the proposal referred to as Pon Park residence residences with the understanding that it requires further review and approval by the city commission and I'd like to second that second so we have a motion by Miss Spain a second by Miss D to approve um the transfer can we call the role Please Mr Mr chair yes um just before we call roll I just want to if I may yeah um just I want to point out a lot of the public comment that we received was focused on the the vacation of the alley uh I just want to point out that that was discussed at the last meeting and that was denied at the last meeting so that's not the proposal we're voting on today this is just for the tdrs thank you for the clarification we do have the motion and the second on the transfer only can we call the role please okay Mr Maxwell yes Mr Rando yes Mr Silva yes Mr Gillis yes on the transfer only Mr Arin haft yes okay Miss Spain yes Miss da yes Mr Garcia Pon yes motion to approve passes 8 to zero thank you everybody um Miss Banas yes sir any items from the secretary or discussion items Yes actually if we could put the presentation back up I did want to bring um forward the two properties that had been previously um discussed and um mentioned by Mr Gillis for 825 South alhamra and 9485 Old Cutler Road sorry this is there we okay I believe this is the 825 South Alhambra Circle property that um was being me was mentioned this property is at the rear of uh an existing house on South Alhambra that um is a newer construction building the residence and then this property was um included in the 1950s um tax card but was not part of the original permit application for the property this is built as a storage building um originally this was just a boat slip and um in the 1970s was um altered to include um to install new windows a whole new roof system and a steel frame um on the interior of the building uh the kind of discussion that we had had was that the building may fall into the category of the Coral Rock thematic group but it is outside the um sorry I lost my notes um the outside of the period of significance for that thematic group um again we always have the determination request per process through um the city code for any demolitions or the buildings and um we're being flagged a lot of times for PE properties that are um being majorly modified and working with development services so that we're tagged on any demolition within um the permitting system we will get there but it's something we are working on Miss B what are the years again what's the years of the the time per I couldn't find the original drawings for this one I did see the 1977 application for the installation of their Windows roof and um and the steel frame and then the tax card for the property is the residen is 1943 the um I have it here don't know why I'm trying to do it off memory uh the residence was 1941 the garage was 1943 and then what they have here is carport and then storage is kind of the um 1957 and pool the period of significance for the um thematic Coral rock group is ends on sorry 1943 to um sorry the the mtic rock group is 1906 to 1938 38 okay thank you you want to do them both or Want U yep and then the next property was um the to uh water tower that is located at 9485 Old Cutler Road um this is part of the original development of Arthur Vining Davis um at Journey's End and was transformed as a lookout tower um for sightsee for his guests that wanted to sightsee for a 1956 article that we received but was originally um an art deco style water tower uh the listings that we found just for the property now it's a little bit difficult to get information because all of the fabric from that time period of Arthur um Davis is pretty much been demolished and Journey's End has been redeveloped as more new construction um but the listings for this specific property for that were that was recently on sale mentioned that um the the tower was renovated to like a guest house and office but that the original elevator that he had um installed in it was there so again it's not in threat for the flood zone because we had talked about it being in the minimal flood zone and then um we have that process for determination of any P properties that um request Demolition and did you give us a year and I missed it the one that I could find on here was through a 1956 article just stating of when Arthur B um Vining Davis had come to the uh acquire the property in the 1940s 1940s thank you so much Mr Gillis okay the me to go back period of significance for the Coral Rock thematic group why was that selected why was that the date period that was selected is that because the last one was constructed in 1938 probably the last one that was included within that designation report I'll have to double check that since it was done few years ago many years ago and I was not here for it because it seems to me this would be another I mean from my understanding the the Coral Rock Cottage that was designated on Davis Road was not included in that it was done separately so I I I've been by this building I just don't see how it has never been preserved per se um um but I'd like to hear from the other board members if they're interested or what what else could be done about this I mean maybe the homeowners could be reached out to to at least start an initial discussion to make sure they and you can look at it and see that it's a unique building material so we could send a letter to the owners just kind of that I mention to them that we have you know our board has had discussion on it um but without it being a threat and it being an older Coral Rock building that seemed to had a significant renovation in the the' 70s um MH it actually didn't even have Windows originally the windows were added in the' 70s along with the existing roof structure that's there now it was more of an it seemed to be because of this permit drawing that it was an open kind of storage building beforehand and then the windows were added later on well let's before we send a letter I let's have some discussion on the board does anybody have any thoughts or comments or or none there was no permits in the system current that are you know putting the building at thread or for the development of the site that I saw so the build the building was 1957 approximately the tax card is between the development of the site go runs from 94 I mean 43 to 57 you know it doesn't have to necessarily be in the Thematic group I mean it meets the time frame and it ALS and it could meet you know other other characteristics so yeah I don't think staff just gave us information yeah this is just an initial pass of kind of what we can get again it's a storage building and the develop the site has been demoed and new and a new house constructed in later on so it's not even the original um site of the property oh so the other the original house is gone right oh wow yeah very altered many times yeah that I think is what's happening multiple additions changes of style and so it's like no longer what was there most of these Coral Rock kind of vernacular buildings including the one on Davis there's not a lot of Records on them I don't think they had architecture and so the last thing that I saw at least for that building was 200000 where they did an interior renovation and what they did is ADD like tile floors and renovate the bathroom mhm and it's two rooms and a b and two bathrooms in the middle for that interior renovation permit okay I wonder if they CED The Rock on Mr Silva just a quick you I'm sorry sorry if I missed it you said this that building falls in the flo Falls no does not it does not it's no okay neither of them do okay so you're going to send a letter saying hello and we talked about it we can do that we're here we could do that um okay so those were those two and then the about the Old Cutler that's a much more yeah I think that one if we we'd have kind of to go back to the Miami dat records also since it was originally a water tower the um the development of the site like I said everything surrounding it is relatively new the Journey's End recognizes it and they actually I saw it in one of their homeowners associations things that they highlighted as one of the original features of their founder and all of that so it is something that again is protected with our demolition process of requiring the determination I think it's connection back to um Arthur Vining Davis is important but again we I saw no development of the site the property was for sale recently but was kind of marketed as having this beautiful Tower and guest it has like a guest house and there were some interior photos that were interesting and um and some of the original features on the inside were still there so so it's not currently in a flood zone but it is on Old Cutler so that's very close to the coast if those flood zones were changed then this could be you know and we could do the same I mean I think what we we would like to kind of see where the new owner is kind of understand where their plans are maybe for the site again explain to them that we have that demolition process and but I think it's one of those buildings that noted as an immediate threat I understand that we can't control a state legislation because that's out of our hands but even with that state legislation they put timelines on like properties having to be de designated x amount of years earlier or being on the national register within a certain time frame so I don't know if something happens today that it'll fix tomorrow's problem mhm just on the way that they've been approaching these one of the reasons I brought these properties up to share with the board is that in speaking to friends and residents one of the criticisms has been that this board has been preserving a lot of the 1920s Cottages but some of the older Pro the older the later in years but younger in a sense the brutalist buildings the modern buildings and structures like this that are so unique have not been preserved so I would like to see the board take an action especially on this one to move this forward so that it is officially preserved um but I mean if you want to start by reaching out with a letter I would like that you may find that try to give them some time and sit down with them explain to them the the conditions and what it means and all of that I think it's important to kind of give the owners opportunity I mean if this isn't a historic building what would be south of us one that's the way that I kind of look at it so thank thank you mrft quick question if the current state which it which is influx and Tallahassee uh for the you know the the flood zone legislations but my recollection was that early on that if a property owner actually came forward and requested that it be historically designated ated would that I remember there being a condition that if it was done on the uh yes at the request of the property owner yes I'm not sure if that exists in the current version of things but um and that actually goes to my next and discussion point and I understand that could be in flux but if that's the case and if the property owner appreciates the the the value of this they might be willing to volunteer office that's why we want them just to be able to communicate with them initially I think that would be a good idea yes Mr Maxwell you know since we're looking at this particular area I would very much uh encourage the the city staff to also look at mat and hammock Park you know we have County facilities located with historic County facilities located two blocks from that one is designated that are falling apart yeah and that are within our city and our jurisdiction even though they lie even though they're owned by the county so you know there's a greenhouse that is you know by William Lyman Phillips U and also the entry gate to uh maton hammock Park all both of which those structures are very historic they're CCC structures and um quite one of them is quite prominent and quite prominently falling down so we're not doing our job you know in maintaining that and uh working with our sister brother cousin whatever you know at the County so I think that those the two of those things should maybe all go together you know or at least in your look not necessarily in the same letter but uh different in in in a look South so there was at recently the county came with some questions about some of the buildings of maton hammock maybe can check in MH yeah we have I have a contact there that had been reaching out to us with some work that they were proposing for the site for some bathroom improvements and things like that so I would also include Fairchild H you know Tropical Park because I mean they've just done some things you know recently to the Bailey Palm Glade that that significantly changed you know how that works they're trying to meet code but they sure didn't do a very good job of it and they they so I mean I think that you know looking at that and that sort of totality we we need to begin to look at that and and put places like Fair child on notice that they need to come to us you know when they're having things like that actually they don't Mr right so there's there's jurisdictional questions but if you can then maybe come back with an update unless Mr half was next if you have something Miss pay the only part of fair child that is designated as historic is a gat house the rest of the property is not designated so when they change their exhibits that does not have to come to this board it it's not about the exhibit it's about when they change the facility I I understand but the only building that's designated as historic is that gate housee when you first enter it the other buildings the rest of the property is not designated as historic that's a conversation we can have but but that's what understand what I'm what my at least my intention You Know M Spain was to see if Miss peris would begin to move that process a little bit more forward because you know we have these things and we're going to lose them you know simply because we have an extra exercise the jurisdiction over it thank you Mr Maxwell Mr AR I was just going to add that in addition there are multiple other structures there's an incinerator on the side which is on the water side there is uh an otic Stone structure that that has um bathroom facilities in it there are all of the all of the uh um from from the The Works project the walls walls the walls I mean a multitude of of things so um I was not involved in the designation know what's design I would really propose that we move forward you know in beginning to designate some of these things in a in a large way otherwise we're going to lose them you know we're going to lose them to bad maintenance which is what's happening right now and um or lack of or just you know benign to left and these are pretty pretty important little things I think so they designed by the man that made Bach Tower Landscaping m b could you could you follow up with the county on the Max on the meth hammock Park um and verify the well with ma maim park with jurisdiction make sure that we understand all jurisdictional relevance with that particular property um and then if you wish to add another letter to Fairchild and check in with them as well and give us a report back yep we'll do okay we're still on Old business folks let's the old business go ahead I oh oh I was just going to state that the since we were discussing the the bills that were coming up um the commission passed a resolution at the last meeting opposing um SB 1526 and HB 1647 um the properties that are being affected must be SE word of the Coastal Construction Control line which cor Gables is does not fall under it's still a preemption that we should be showing opposition toward and that's what the commission felt and passed the resolution um the last meeting um hold on and Madam city tr I think we talked about this board last year had a recommendation to the city commission to do exactly what they did at this last meeting they jumped the gun this time they did it without you y so Mr Silva that's sort of I think your comment from the last meeting um it's they beat us to it that's it from me thank you any new business or any this is old business but I do have something I'm I'm concerned about historic fabric closer to home I'm going to bring up the windows again because I I really think that we should there may be a window of opportunity here that we can actually convince the city commission to uh save these buildings and restore them other than uh uh to replace them with new I know that they received a ton of money to to replace the windows but maybe that's something that can be modified so we could still use that money I do think that you could contact the National Trust because they could weigh in on whether or not they're significant to this building um and that would be helpful because I'm sure that if you talk to someone at the at the state level or the national level that that they would consider since this is a national landmark that the original Windows should stay I know I did something similar like that for at my position at city of Miami and they actually said that they would not put anything in writing getting involved um so it just depends I think on who's there's a well relatively new preservation officer but again we could reach out and just see yeah they have in the past and I think right they did that's why we had reached out originally but um I think just depending on who staff there um there has I mean in light of the last Commission meeting um you know city manager was fired so we do have um kind of a new inter manager was adamantly opposed to keeping them so I think at this point quite possibly we we could um just let the commission know what the proper thing is to do with these windows I'm just say so did we're talking just for clarity the city corable city hall window replacement um Miss berus we did pass a res resolution to the commission with an order of things as to um is there an update on the so and that actually falls in the motion that was passed with the with the funds was um for $2 million I don't know I and I believe it says it doesn't say specifically replacement oh it doesn't no I believe and then it it was it was for modifications of the windows and anything to come back here but also for me to be inv involved in any discussions that we're have been having so again that is if the city manager chooses to proceed under the exemption in the zoning code that exempts that process exempts you all from that process so not we would still be part of the original that's all contingent understand so yeah nothing has proceeded right so I can I can meet with the interim city manager and see where if there's action that he's going to be taking or if that's something that's going to fall on a new permanent city manager you may not want want to uh go forward with something since he's an interim but but I I just think it's so important that these wind these original windows stay in this building and it's a big mistake for the building to bypass the historic preservation board that they put in place uh on on something that's so important I would be very upset uh if the and the motion was that it would to go that way that's not necessarily what will happen because there is that CLA the zoning code that allows to go forward on City buildings without so Donna but that's that was the resolution that was adopted by the commission that should the city manager proceed under that exemption under the zoning code it would still come to you all for review and recommendation it would not be binding but it would still come to you all so either way it proceeds it will be coming to you all unless there's a change in um legislation by the by the commission so that was the action that they took after the motion that you all had made I'm happy I have it right here if you'd like to read it to you what it said yeah I believe you okay thank you Miss pennis I I I think we'd all appreciate it if you have a moment with the interim city manager to bring this item up yes because our intention isn't just the kind of late in the game conversation we want to be there early in the game so as early as you can we'd appreciate and the last meeting that I had with the previous city manager and the staff working on that that was the um uh with Public Works he we had planned for him to come within the next two months to present um so we will see where that lands and I will follow up with the interm to see if that's something that they want to take on or is that something that we want to push on to the new permit Mr Maxwell you know when when I presented the motion to the commission you know we had a slight discussion and you know there's lots of alternatives to this you know where the windows have to be removed they need to be you know and because we have to you know the frames around that all have to be filled in and so the windows do need to be taken out but they can be put back and should be put back as Mrs Spain is saying and any hurricane protection can be on the inside right and that was another motion that you all have we I mean the windows aren't open anyway so I mean put a fixed pain in there you know make it look good so we're not changing our motion our intentions we would just like to for you to please check in yes I can do that the one of the con comments that came up when we talked about the interior panel was um you all would be then okay if the windows are not um operable and absolutely a give and take sometimes of what is you know this is where I'm letting know where the discussion I'm letting you know where this disc started working here in 1997 never and have I'm not anyone turning around and opening the windows behind you offices all around this mine open never opened up a window I open mine all the time mine open he has a great third floor you Miss B us is are from the bo any other old business from the board hey this is the feedback that I received any other old business Mr Mr sorry do we need to make no a statement that we're okay with them not being operable no no okay all right think we need to go there Mr Maxwell his Paris is there any update on the the meeting on the regarding the street lights I was waiting for the city clerk to get back to me for March 13th and I believe believe that the board liaison is out of the office so I was I'm waiting to hear back Mar 13th Would Be The Joint meeting yes that's the date that we're depending on the confirmation that I receive um the we'll plan for a 4:00 meeting um at the police on fire station so that we have a bigger room the U let's not say anything on the record until it's on the record so we don't know when it's going to happen don't know what's going to happen no confirmed date at this time no confirmed date thank you anything else from the board any Mr Silva just I think we we need to vote to excuse Mr danana no you no there's no more votes to excuse so an email was sent out by the city clerk's office so that you all are aware that um excused absences are actually excused by staff and there are three reasons why you are excused and that is sickness illness and um sorry illness travel and jury duty if you are not one of those three you are considered unexcused so please if you are submitting to me a request let me know and the request needs to be made prior to the board meeting if you can illness is illness yes and we did did we all receive the notice if you didn't receive one from the clerk's office the clerk's office check your email cuz they did send it out anything else from the board staff any motion to adjourn motion motion to adjourn um second Miss Miss Spain all in favor I motion is meeting is to journ at 6:05 thank you everyone thank you for a wonderfully concise and streamline meeting how did everyone recording stopped e e e e e e e for