##VIDEO ID:Yviuey60-PQ## [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] for [Music] [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e e e that was funny okay um we are expecting oh did you sign it's okay just e okay so we got this oh my god um I was just going to remind you to please make sure that Elizabeth I'm going to do [Music] is it too burden to ask you to print my agendas on the items to print yeah in other words what whatever it is oh like the attachments and everything the attachments and everything okay I don't see a reason why not all this stuff like just for every meeting for every meeting just for meeting just like I'm a visual learner iin got it the iPad is not doing it for you okay no problem recording in progress [Music] good afternoon welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the city of KL Gables historic preservation board we are residents of Carl Gables and are charged with the preservation and protection of historic or architecturally worthy building structures sites neighborhoods and artifacts which imp part a distinctive distinct 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 acts as a lobbyist pursuant to the city of KL Gable's ordinance number 2006-11 must register with the city clerk prior to engaging and lobbying activities or presentations before City staff boards committees Andor 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 this T Pres board and 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 modifications of any ordinance resolution action or decision of any City Commissioner any action decision recommendation of the city manager any border committee including but not limited to quasi judicial Advisory Board trust Authority or counsel 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 Bard 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 3 of the city of crow G city code I now officially call the city of cro Gables preservation board meeting of September 18th 2024 to order the time is 4:11 p.m. present today are to my left Miss Rando Mr Silva Mr Maxwell to my right Miss Spain Miss Alvarez Mr BOS and myself Caesar Garcia PS approval of the minutes uh the next item on the agenda agenda is approval of the minutes of the meeting being held on August 21st 2024 are there any changes or Corrections is there a motion to approve move to approve is there a second second motion by Mr B second by Mr Maxwell all in favor I any opposed none opposed I wasn't present so I don't know if I could vote you can you can yes okay yes motion passes 7 nothing oh yeah 7 to zer um please be advised that this board is a quasi judicial board and the items on the agenda are Quasi judicial in nature which requires board members to disclose all 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 if anyone has made any contact with a board member when the issue comes before the board the member must State on the record the existence of the expart communication the party who originated the communication and whether the communication will affect the board member's ability to impartially consider the evidence to be presented regarding the matter does anybody wish to um discuss any expart Communications at this time um deferrals Madam preservation officer are there any referrals for today's meeting yes um good afternoon we had do have one deferral for case File lhd 20249 the consideration of the local storic designation of the property at 1414 gallano will be deferred to the October 16th 2024 historic preservation board meeting October 16th thank you the adem is defer which 56 second historic um swearing in if any persons in the audience wish will be testifying today please rise to be sworn in if you're on Zoom you must be on camera is there anyone on Zoom yes you wish to be sworn in yes you need to be on camera there you go can you speak it to the mic absolutely will you raise your right hand to be sworn do you sore affirm the testimony about to give should be the truth or truth and nothing but the truth yes yes okay thank you all right let's get on the first item local historic designations case File lhd 20243 consideration of the local historic designation of the property at 1116 ala Street legally described as Lot 19 block 2 Carl Gables Granada section amended plat according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 13 at page 51 of the public records of Miami day County Florida Miss Gwyn do you have a something for the record I do good afternoon everyone Elizabeth Gan historic preservation coordinator the following presentation is a brief summary of the historic designation report prepared by staff can you please play the PowerPoint the property at 1116 alker street is before you for you raise the volume please as a local Historic Landmark it is the result of historic significance determination application filed by the [Music] owner as per article 8 section 88-103 of the Coral Gable zoning code criteria for designation of local historic landmarks a local Historic Landmark must have significant character interest or value as part of the historical cultural archaeological aesthetic or architectural Heritage of the city state or Nation for of property must meet one of the criteria outlined in the code 1116 albera street is eligible as a local Historic Landmark based on three significance criteria historical cultural significance criteria four exemplifies the historical cultural political economic or social trends of the community architectural significance criteria one portrays the environment in Era of History characterized by one or more distinctive architectural style and criteria 2 embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period or method of construction the single family residence is located on a block west of Granada Boulevard on an interior 50 by 97 ft lot between Mariana Avenue and Venicia Terrace in the Granada [Music] Place George Merck founded Coral Gables in the early 1920s based on his vision for a Mediterranean inspired City the city's developmental history is divided into three major historical periods during the initial developmental period architectural design specifically combined elements commonly used in the Spanish Morse and Italian architecture and has come to be known as the Mediterranean Revival style during the 1920s structures and amenities were built almost exclusively in this style the home at 1116 albera Street occurred during this initial phase and is indicative of the type of architecture that was the founding premise of Coral Gables it exemplifies the Mediterranean ideals and climate adaptations espoused by Coral Gables founder George Merrick and his design team Coral Gables was originally conceived as a suburb of Miami and attracted investors from Across the Nation during the south Florida real estate boom of the 1920s mer Drew from Garden City and City beautiful movements of the 19th and early 20th century to create his vision for a fully conceived mediteran inspired city which is now considered to be one of the first modern plan communities in the United States nationally acclaimed landscape architect Frank button drew the first comprehensive mths of Coral Gables in 1921 and 22 one of which is on the left of this Slide the initial construction of Coral Gables was concentrated in sections a through e which were located near Merck's Plantation throughout 1922 and 1923 mer continued to amass additional land Holdings he was particularly interested in detaining the land north of to the Tamiami Trail in the area outlined in Blue on these Maps as you can see on the map on the left in 1922 he only held the Lots on either side of Granada Boulevard over the next year he acquired large portions of land in this area and renamed it the Granada [Music] section in November 1923 mer launched the Granada section publishing numerous adds an article stating his intention for the area like the one Illustrated here in accordance with the Garden City precepts that got at Merck's development of Coral Gables the new Granada section was intentionally platted with smaller Lots on some streets for modest homes Granada Place seen here outlined in Orange was one of these sections Mer's plan for the smaller homes was that they were to be built with the same highquality construction and Mediterranean Revival style features as other structures that shaped the new city in the early [Music] 1920s mer pled at the first section of Granada Place in January 1925 in the early 1920s Merck's team handled most of the building in Coral Gables by the mid 1920s the community's rapid expansion outpaced the capacity of Merck's team and they began recruiting leading Architects Builders and investors from across the country permit documents indicate that that Indiana based teams were predominantly responsible for the early development of Granada Place the building of homes both large and modest throughout the Granada section area happened at a rapid Pace during the mid 1920s the Granada play section followed this trend with construction of these 17 homes on this small plat over a few months due to the 1926 hurricane and the economy there was no further building in this area for almost two decades the postwar homes that followed National Trends and were distinct departure from the ornamented and picturesque Mediterranean Revival style that had dominated the city's landscape in the 1920s 1116 Al burka Street retains its historic integrity and stands amongst these newer homes as a testament to am's vision for a Mediterranean inspired plan [Music] Community what has become known as the Coral Gables Cottage started with Mer's Commission in the Granada section to design finely detailed Mediterranean vial style homes on these smaller lots to demonstrate that the moderately priced homes in Coral Gables would have the same quality of construction and aesthetic as the larger homes 1116 Al burka street is an example of one of these moderately priced [Music] homes the one-story single family residents at 1116 albera Street is designed in the Mediterranean Revival style some of its character defining features include the textured stucco finish combination of roof types with pitch gable roof clad and Barrel tile and the flat roof parait and Barrel tile copings there is a front projecting and recess Bays of varying Heights across the facade is a series of arched openings it also has a visually dominant chimney and round vents are used as decorative accents on facades there's a porker share and the windows originally casements are recessed with projecting [Music] Sills The Residence at 1116 Al Burker Street has had no additions it retains its original massing and style primary alterations involve enclosing the front and rear screened porches for living space and the change of Window and Door types the original windows were casements the current windows are fixed awning ENC casement and type the aing windows were installed in 1982 and most of the fixed encasement windows in 2019 the front facade has three distinct protruding receding Bays the front entry the original front porch and the pork cair each has a separate roof of varying Heights all of the openings on these bays are [Music] arched the front entry Bay with its side-facing gable roof is at the Northeast portion of the home Rising through the Gable apex of the B's North facade is a partially protruding flared chimney a series of round vents wrap around its top providing a decorative accent to this character defining feature the front entry is a large semicircular Archway centered on the East facade of the bay the original door was an arched double door that filled the opening the current configuration of a central single door with side and fan lights was installed in 2019 the front entry is flanked by single arched Windows the same window configuration also flanks the chimney on the North facade and is on the protruding portion of the West [Music] facade flat roof Center Bay was originally a large screened porch the majority of the home's exterior alterations involved this porch and they occurred over several campaigns as seen on the left this green porch was originally designed with full height arched opening supported by slender columns in 1982 with a permit for awning windows it was enclosed for living space the permit is for five Windows suggesting that at this time or by this time the opening on the North facade seen in the photo on the upper right was enclosed a permit for hurricane shutters records the openings were still full length in 2000 it appears that the windows were reduced in size and the columns were removed when the current windows were installed in 2019 all protruding Sills are still EXA so the size of the original openings is easily discerned additionally a recent interior view from realtor.com shows that the original columns were retained inside and these could be used as templates to rein atate the exterior columns at a future date the southern Bay of the front facade is the Porco share it has a flat roof with Barrel tile copings on the parapets the east west and south openings are large semicircular arches as seen here the Porco share and the South Side facade remain unaltered [Music] the only substantial changes to the north side and rear facades are the enclosing of the screen back porch to extend the kitchen and moving the back door from the north to the rear facade this change occurred prior to [Music] 1991 in conclusion the single family Residence at 1116 albera Street was permitted in November 1925 in accordance with Garden City precepts that guided Merrick's development of Coral Gables the new Granada section was intentionally ploted with smaller lots and some areas for modest homes that were to be built with the same highquality construction and mediterian vial style features as other structures that shaped the new city in the early 1920s they were built adjacent to and in harmony with other homes and Coral Gables these homes are recognized as an important feature in the initial planning of Coral Gables while the home at 1116 Alber Berker Street has had some alterations over the past Century it still retains its historic Integrity as a 1920s Mediterranean Revival style moderate home in keeping with Merck's Vision hence the property at 116 albera street significantly contributes to the historic fabric of the City of Coral Gables and is part of a collection of quality buildings that serve as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city staff recommends approv approval of the local historic designation of the property at 1116 albera Street based on its historical cultural and Architectural significance thank you Elizabeth um is the applicant or owner here wish to speak you don't have to would you like to great um okay uh let's open it up to public comment um does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor or opposition to this case is anybody on Zoom Miss Pedas you sent some information today about the letters um of public comment do you have the names of those folks can you read those into the record please if you give me two seconds um we did receive public comment in advance of the meeting and all of that was um sent to you all uh those were by uh Mr Brett Gillis uh Miss Alice goldhagen um Mr and Mrs Jamie and zulie Paro um Miss K carbonel on behalf of the hpac and Miss Ellen Dyer and all in support and support thank you all right this closes public hearing bring you back to the board does anybody have any discussion no discussion all right anybody want to make a motion I think we should discuss the Integrity of the uh the building which I believe does uh um qualify U but I think because the alterations are on the fun facade I think it's important that we talk about that um uh uh the code is very specific it says that um that structures uh are of local importance uh and historically significant if they possess Integrity of location which it does setting materials and workmanship absolutely and design and I believe that even though those arches have been shortened it it's still possessed Integrity of design I think that's important to note for the designation Mr my only comment thank you Miss I I agree as well um I think the the massing of the house remains pretty intact most of the masonry openings are are as originally designed um the screen porch has obviously been altered um but as as as they pointed out in the in the report um the Sills at the bottom are still there so you can still read the the old openings um and and the fact that the columns exist on the interior is great so this the the Mason the structure is still there so it's easily reversible it's the definition of easily reversible right um if somebody wants to restore that as an open porch they can fairly easily and and they can use the the interior columns as a guide for for restoring the exterior so so I think it does Merit a designation I had a question uh I don't think you're on right thank you in the staff report there was a reference to the absence of the um a true Barrel tile roof under the current conditions and noted that that was missing from and basically it didn't the home did not meet the criteria of the Coral Gables Cottage without counting the true Barrel tile um on the roof to be installed my question for staff is do we have to condition our approval on that adding that criteria no the designation today is as a local Historic Landmark not as a c Gable Cottage those items are identified in the list as as optional to the homeowner to restore as part of the corate colleage criteria if it's something they want to pursue okay thank you thank you Mr Mr a chair Mr yeah in addition to that I think it has been touched by all the board members but it's important to point out in the report the the the finding Chara the mediterranian Revival characteristics that the home has so the recess windows with projecting Sills the round vents as deorative accents Barrel tiles roof the p uh the port I'm Sor I'm my French is horrible I hope I'm saying this properly Portico chair with Arch opening the The prominent chimney with one vent accents the ser of arches including the arch front entry the VAR Heights between project projecting and recess Port uh portions of the of the front facade and the projecting Bane the front elevation as well as the Gable The Gables roof the barrel tiles and the flat roof combination with a parapet so I I believe as has been referenced by my other colleagues that it does need the the necessary criteria and that they should be primed for designation thank you Mr B is there a motion so moved Mr BOS has a motion to approve yes but let let me be a little more specific okay so it's a is a a motion to approve the local historic designation of the property at 1116 albera Street legally described as Lot 19 block 2 Section uh Coral Gables Granada play section uh section amended plat according to the plat there off off as recorded in the plat book 133 at page 51 of the public records of Miami Lake County Florida based on historical culture and Architectural significance which are exemplified by three different criteria as providing in corg soning court article 8 section 81-103 specifically the historic cultural significance Criterion four exemplifies the historic cultural political economic or social trends of the community are they being architectural significant Criterion one or Trace environment in an area historic character characterized by one or more distinctive AR architectural Styles criteria number two embodies those distinguished characteristics of the architectural style or period or method of construction in addition to that I would like to incorporate by reference as further as further um support for my motion the staff report itself the uh the comments uh that were presented by uh by staff uh on by the um and by the the folks that that provide a public comment as well as the comments that were um presented by my colleagues here on the days thank you Mr Vanos we have a motion is there a second second M second by Mr orando any discussion let's call the RO Miss Alvarez yes Mr Maxwell yes Mr Silva yes Miss Spain yes Miss Rando yes Mr BOS yes Mr Garcia P yes motion passes 7 to zero thank you very much um next itema case File COA 2024-25 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 236 Alo Avenue a local Historic Landmark legally described as Lots 4 to7 inclusive block 18 Coconut Grove section part one according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 14 at page 25 of the public records of mday County Florida the application requests design approval for additions and alterations to the residence and site work a variance is being requested from section 2-101 D 4bi of the corable zoning code for the minimum required side setback for the construction of the new addition good afternoon Anna peris preservation officer um this property was permitted oh could we please have the presentation the staff presentation thank you um this property was permitted in January 26 the single family Residence at 236 Alo Avenue has retained its historic integrity and context for nearly a century and the property was designated a local Historic Landmark on May 17th 2024 the scope of work contained in this application includes the demolition of an aluminum screen porch enclosure and approximately 830t addition to the east side of the existing 2,180 ft home the one-story addition consists of a family room dining room kitchen and breakfast room the addition is primarily under a gabled roof with a higher flat roof portion over the kitchen there is a full interior remodel new windows and doors and site work that includes a new covered Terrace with an outdoor kitchen and pool deck and new pool a variance is also being requested for the side setback uh the proposed one-story addition is set back 1 10 from the original front wall of the building and projects to the east approximately 42 ft uh the addition slightly steps between the dining in the kitchen and flat roof is introduced to help mitigate the large mass being added to the front of the building staff recognized the applicant's intent of minimizing the impact of the addition of the original structure and maintaining most of the modifications where the screened in porch once existed staff shared concerns with the proposed location of the addition but understands that the intent was to protect the original two-story projecting Bay at the center of the building on the east side um staff would recommend that the addition be differentiated from the original including the window sills and stucco finish and so it's hard to see here but there's a little projecting Bay here that was identified as part of the um one of the character defining features in the designation um a variance is also being requested of section 2-101 d B D4 B1 bi of the crog zoning code for the minimum required side setback for the construction of the new addition uh the proposed addition is approximately 42 ft long and requires a side setback variance of approximately 4' 6 in staff believes the existing 100x 100 site condition allows for the applicant to reconfigure the addition to meet the zoning setback requirement without having an adverse effect to the historic property uh and recommends denial of the variants uh and also recommends denial due to that uh recommends denial of the sca uh and would like staff I mean the applicant to work to reconfigure the addition to meet the zoning code requirements and this is a photo of the existing condition with the um screened in por at the B side thank you Miss benis is the owner applicant cgtv can we have the applicants presentation please that's uh good afternoon board thank you for having me my name is Ral I'm a theal Architects I'm presenting uh the client we're doing we're proposing the addition for this lovely home um to give you a little bit of background uh my client purchased this property and they were very excited to uh move into it and do an addition uh through our permitting process uh we went in front of the boa and with their recommendation had not been designated uh historical with their recommendation they requested or they asked the client for us to move towards historical and designated as historical uh the client did the owner did uh did a we're we're more than happy to work with the historical they do appreciate the property very much so and to give you a little background we've been going back and forth with the board for almost four or five revisions to make sure that everything fits as we think would uh help with the addition itself and keep uh keep the structure itself uh in in in the best shape possible without creating any disturbing to the actual property itself or being overwhelming in any way um with that said so oh no is that you or cgtv okay you can point with that thing it's the the slides are twisted oh that's a problem cgtv is that the presentation or there you go that must that's still sideways I can I can do it through Zoom is that possible yeah for some reason CG cgtv we're going to have somebody join via Zoom if we could um authorize them once they join to share their [Music] screen staff is Mr raal going to need some assistance with his laptop uh I do you have the zoom uh I'm opening the zoom up right now okay and [Music] how meeting um if you could put the property address your name so we can make sure they select the right person well I'm just going to see if the meeting ID do I need a link for that seems to me if you had it on some kind of a drive you could just take that up they show maybe they can just plug it in no if this is going to take a few minutes I'm going to defer the item and go to the next item would you like to do that huh I just I'm sorry just hold it and go to the next item that's that's fine with me yes while we okay let's do that so you guys can with Cal all right we're going do we do we need to do anything we have half of a presentation no I just I I we can hear you I I understand that the board is um putting this uh putting it on the table for the moment while we um move on to the next item and we'll return to it and resume the public hearing then perfect thank you okay we're going to go on to the next item um case File CP 2024 d024 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriat for the property at 26 2 2 Country Club pra a local Historic Landmark legally described as Lots 11 through 13 Block 14 C Gable section D according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 25 at page 74 of the public records of Maday County Florida a variance is being requested from section 2-101 D4 bi of the corable zoning code for the minimum side setback and the minimum overall side setback for the construction of a new pool okay so I'm being forced into the current Millennium you can do it good afternoon all right here's the location map of the property uh 2622 country Le it is an individually designated Landmark um it was designed in say 1927 home in 1927 the architect um is is a rare one for us his name is Robert chenani there's not a lot known about him designated in 2013 um the application requests approval for um a pool rear deck um and uh swimming pool there are unusual sight conditions on the property um there's a very limited area in which they can place the pool so staff was comfortable with the variance request I'll let them present and then go through the our our recommendation great house this is a 1940 yeah it's a beautiful house and they've done I'm sorry name and address kks Architects We're The Architects for the project uh forgive me I'm little rusty there um yeah it's a beautiful house the owner has uh done a very good job of uh keeping it uh upkeeping it and restoring it um the house um has all the attributes of the houses of that area uh the the one thing uh the house used to be a full the lot used to it's two lot it was two lots when they bought it was the pr lot on the 57th lot they they were never subdivided so the reason uh there's um the side is kind of compromised because the garage not only is it in the rear but it's turned so uh what we have is a a very beautiful usable Courtyard and um they want to to include a pool in it so you know the 5 ft makes a big difference that's these are the existing conditions again very well very well kept the beautiful example survey you can see there the the paving on the courtyard I don't your packet may include uh a Pergola and a bench that's being taken out I don't think you're I think that's uh not going to be voted on yeah that was part of the the report is that it's shown in your drawings but it's not approved by the board of Architects but uh historic uh had some comments and the owner was is not going to do it anyway so you know they started pricing it out and and and also they felt it was I was never in favor to begin with so I'm glad it was St so my presentation does not show that so it's kind of a reduced version of what you have we we're meeting all the you know all the other zoning requirements the only thing is that setback and as you can see the pool's already I think at about 9 ft or 10 ft more so that's the existing floor plan and we want what we want to try to do is keep the you know the courtyard as a usable space the changes to the front are from a actually a chain link fence I don't know how that got in well it's at the corner that's going to be a wall now that's really the only change in the front um um this is the rear again the same the only changes right now is going to be the wall versus the chaining fence which I think is a positive change on the side you you're going to get a gate between the that barbecue structure and the garage and similarly on on the south elevation so the only vertical elements here are really that wall and the gate I mean I almost didn't come I missed you guys so so yeah I mean I don't I don't uh I don't know that I've done a variance in a while so I don't know how so the the the property originally had the lots to the rear to going all the way to Red Road and also the lots to its um South on Country Club PR and neither of those lots changed the garage configuration it was always in the rear always side facings with that driveway going all the way around so um we felt that it was a it was a appropriate request great any um does that conclude your presentation it does I'm here to answer any questions we're seeking your approval obviously uh we we feel that it's a minimal you know uh uh intrusion but again I haven't done a variance in a while so I don't I don't know the temperature of the variance any any any questions you may have for me I'm happy to answer we have a couple of items any questions Mr BOS Den neighbor any objections from him no there hasn't been any objections by anybody but have you asked Pard have you asked I haven't personally asked I'm assuming that it got posted and uh for not any reasons having to do with the with the Departments this has been in the process for almost a year the owner took his time we got approval at the board I sat around for a while so if somebody was in opposition they they have plenty of time to to uh come forward I I so it's timeon Mr Silva uh so I this is actually this follows on the heels of of I think two meetings ago where we had extensive discussion on on rear buildings right and and on rear garages and the importance of those things to be saved when they can right so this house technically by right could demolish that garage well I mean not by right but it could you could have brought a proposal to us that demolishes that garage you comply with zoning because you have a carport and that would make your life a lot easier right but in this case I think it's it's important to save that garage you're not proposing to demolishment if if we get a case like this where we are asked to make a small variance on something that that in my opinion is minor and allows us to save that garage I believe that is is more important and looking at the eight conditions that are required for analysis of the zoning I think this property complies because of the placement of that garage and its rotation at 90 degrees so to me um I I would be in favor of granting the gr thank you we feel the same way I mean it's any other questions for staff or the applicant okay thank you um let's open it up to public comment does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor against this case is anybody on Zoom okay hearing done the public comment is closed bring you back to the board for discussion you guys can sit down we did have one condition we wanted to see the material of the of the of the what the condition of the material of the papers condition of mat it's fine you don't have a problem it's fine with us yeah yeah I think I think we're calling our oite so we'll bring a sample any additional discussion from the board um since we're asking questions on Miss counts the what's that the variance criteria Legend I don't know what you guys call it um it says here that the answer is yes to all eight questions right G to ask that question again yes um all right is there a motion we have three actually we have three motions right there's two motions well we have the approval of the of the design proposal the sea and then another one for the variance I'll take the um design proposal and the Sea first does anybody have a motion for the design approval um and the and or the seoa I can do that you can do that you do that know I just um I want to suggest uh or make a motion to approve but is it simply to approve per staff or does it have to be a more lengthy explanation um it will be I would imagine a motion you can sort of read what was there if you're if you're in favor of the recommendation of the approval and then State the condition above which is number one you have that page 505 505 I have yeah you would read that this top part a motion to approve we start there and then with a conditional a motion to approve the design proposal for addition oh no so we're only talking about the pool so we would I would modify oh yeah what's written here add oh yeah you would I'm so sorry yes for the to pool de the location of the pool and the design proposal um for 2622 country clip Proto with the condition by staff to provide the material sample for the uite papers before installation and approval of the oh that's condition sorry that's a so we have a motion to approve the design proposal and the sea is there a second second second by Mr BOS is Staff clear on the proposal on excuse me on the motion U regarding just the pool and great any further discussion on the motion all right let's call the role okay Mr Maxwell yes M Rando yes Mr Silva Miss Spain yes Mr Banos yes Miss Alvarez yes Mr Garcia P yes uh motion passes 70 I'll entertain a motion for the variance if the same mover would like to make the motion okay a motion to approve the variance to allow the new pool to have an interior side setback of 5T versus the required 10 feet um and I need to keep reading that summarize it um I think that's that's enough for me okay is there a second second second by Mr Maxwell doesn't it's okay it doesn't affect our um we have a motion and a second any further discussion okay let's call the role Mr Banos yes Miss randoo yes Mr Silva yes Miss Spain yes Mr Maxwell yes Miss Alvarez yes and Mr Garcia P yes motion passes 70 thank you very much um are we ready to go back Mr raal on the other item or keep going great so we're going thank you very thank you Mr we're going to go back to item um SP 2024-25 236 Alo Avenue and the applicant will be presenting uh I think I need to be in cgtv can you make Mr raal Mr Rahal a co-host please that's probably mine okay okay he did it you should yeah uh to go back I'm sorry again about that for some reason uh with other computers it keeps on turning it so I guess the best way to do it is go through this um presentation um as described uh we were uh we proposing uh an add an addition uh We've kept in mind that we want to keep it as minimal to the structure or not to be invasive towards the existing structure as much as possible um so with that in mind we've also um uh discussed with historical to also return back some of the key elements in the facade that was Prior existing such as um the entrance oh this one one point um such as the entrance the large uh Roundtop wind door that was reduced somewhere along the line so in our proposal is to bring the faad back to the way it had been designed originally um in regards to the addition itself uh this is the screen pool area that we're proposing to demolish uh with aluminum screen that was not a part of uh the original house anyways um but one of the key elements that Anna was describing was this little bump out right here that we were trying to keep our addition as small as possible to fit into that location without making it wider um now with that we have some challenges of uh the you know how the square footage that we need and of course with the design with a board of Architects uh to establish a good decent design and again the flat roof as described um arched uh one second here are the elevations that will show the front a little bit more this this is the existing home as it is right now our proposed addition is to be on the left side um we have brought down the height so it's not too uh too imposing on the existing structure or it doesn't overwhelm it itself we recessed the building it the addition itself as you can see right here this is where the addition is we recess the addition at least almost well 1 foot 10 in so it will stand out as an addition not as a part of the original home and as mentioned our addition uh connects here so we don't impose on that little bump out or keep that as least invasive towards that little feature as as much as we can and now in regards to uh some of the setbacks we did provide a 10t 7 in setback on the front which is a lot more than the minimum requirement of the 5 ft now of course there's also another code uh that states uh it's in a Coro Gables section 2-101 which states we have to have 20% um of the setbacks on the sides of the home uh to the lot to the lot width um now the maximum side setback happens to be 20 ft and the minimum side setback because we have a 100 ft uh property it ends up being also 20 ft um now I'm assuming that that code was implemented in there for in order to minimize uh if you have let's say an 80t property uh they don't want you to be too close to the edges however at a 100t uh property that happens to be the same exact number um um now in regards to the design this is the existing um the proposed would be down here these are the more accurate architectural plans uh the rear this is the existing uh the rear the addition would be this area right here and this is the existing in addition to uh any any features that we're remodeling or redoing into the home we're trying to revert it back to its original uh original state so all the windows would be from the original style that it was intended to be side elevation this is a just a massing the the right portion was changed a little bit more uh with the boa but the this is just an idea of uh you know where the stule we're going to differentiate it with smoother stule instead of the rough um for the addition portion and of course return all the original style to the facade that was there um now in regards to neighboring homes most neighboring homes are only 5ot set back from the sides um so we believe that by proposing a 10t 7in setback on the addition part it is more than enough space for you know for it to be recessed from the property line um now it happened to be that the existing uh the existing I'm sorry yes the uh existing carport is 5' 6 in from this side so our addition would be 10 ft 7 in to property line from the front now the property does angle a little bit so towards the rear the addition it will be a 10 foot from the property line um now with that as mentioned I I do believe that interpreting that code for the zoning code with a 20% is to avoid uh different situations than what we're proposing um I don't think that uh you know we we're not asking for variance for a fight you know within the 5ft minimum or anything of that nature uh surrounding homes uh as mentioned this is a corner lot home uh it's almost built you know to the property Edge uh and although a corner lot home it's still you know uh built to the property Edge this is another home that we saw that also I don't believe they have a 15t sub back and with that I mean the point of this is just this to show that it wouldn't be uh something out of it wouldn't stand out like a sore thumb if anything I think a 15t set back from one side on an interior lot would look a little bit awkward and empty I think that if if there are any questions please I can go back and forth through the slide and we'd be more than happy to answer them thank you Mr raal does anybody have any questions for the applicant yes Mr Sila I I'll save my discussion for later but I do have a technical question U maybe it's for staff um so they're asking for a 4 foot6 variance right so that I'm looking at the survey and and that so on the front of the house they've got a an existing about 5'6 six MH setback on one side so if you take the the the 10 ft that they're proposing right that's 156 that's a 4 foot6 setback my question is the are the setbacks different for the rear garage because that is actually closer to the side property line yes that that interpretation was identified by the zoning reviewer during the preliminary review so those numbers are coming from that reviewer and so we are to disregard because we I realized that too there the garage in Clos about a foot closer so he identified it as the the 4ot the 14t 7 I think it is on that east side and and then oh I'm sorry it's not I just want to make sure we're all straight so we know we're we're approving or not approving but so essentially that that garage is sort of being disregarded then from from this at this point yeah that's so that the zoning reviewer interpreted it and I know that they had met with him because I think there was some discussion about the 20% versus the 20 ft and mhm if there was um boa approval for it whether or not that could count toward you moving forward but they recommended that they come here okay for that's if you check um sheets the site plan it's you can see what um Mr Silva is talking about with the sides uh any additional questions for staff or the applicant and I'm not sure if the oh if we could put the presentation his his screen back up uh yeah so this is um the this is what we would propose in the front at 10' 7 in um with the existing setback right now from the properties 5'7 now my concern is also is by providing that setback we have to also accommodate to the client and their needs to make the addition worthwhile I'm afraid that I also don't want to through the design impose any further on the existing structure itself trying to make up for that additional square footage or also create a a a a too much of a courtyard instead of you know something where light can come in and that you know I mean in a design perspective it it would be definitely a challenge to coordinate all of that together um I do have I think I can gather it on the the project meets the F and the lot coverage yes okay the sheets have a lot of comment notes on them but yeah yeah we're we're very this was the only thing identified yeah we're not we're not we're not proposing something extraordinary just something to meet the requirements of just adding one additional kitchen and you know a little bit of a living space but nothing we're not proposing two stories or filling the whole lot if anything actually if I go back to the site plan um you can see on the site plan we have optimal space de here and we've left it open created a beautiful space uh and as I was discussing this is the 14t 7in setback that would be required in the red line as you can see by doing this I would either have to extend this further down alter the design which has taken at least five revisions with the board of Architects and their help to come up with something that we feel is very balanced to fit the structure okay m p no I was just asking what did you just say with about the board of Architects I'm sorry oh uh we've been going back and forth with a board of Architects and they are to put a I mean to what they said it's their baby the last two times is that they they're very happy about the design they're excited and you know um we've come up with this design I would say with collaboration with the board of Architects and their approval so we've had uh some questions um remember there is a a request for design approval uh and an sea so if you have any questions for the architect now is a great time we can also bring it back during discussion um I did have a question for staff um it's a similar question I asked earlier regarding the variance criteria um do you mind going through it as a staff member through each one of them each one yeah okay so we have the list of eight items that we consider during the CR for criteria for a and so we believe that the number one the special conditions that special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other land structures or buildings in the same zoning district and we do not believe it meets that criteria this is a standard 100 by 100 foot lot um that special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant no the situation with that is being um presented before you is created by the applicant by proposing the addition where it is um that granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands buildings or structures in the same zoning District uh that one was yes um that literal interpretation of the provisions of the zoning code would deprive the applicant rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning District under the terms of the zoning code and would work unnecessary and undo hardship on the applicant again no the 20% is the standard for this um property um that the variant Varan granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land building or structure we believe it does not meet that criteria because it is a larger 100 by 100t lot um that granting the variance will not change the use to one that is different from other land in the same district that one is yes um uh that granting of the variance will be in in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the zoning code and that such variants will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare again we said no um and then that granting that the variance is appropriate for the continued preservation of the Historic Landmark or Historic Landmark district and that was a no as well because that we believe it could be reconfigured thank you m PNA so Mr raal you you have stated your case that it's um I I again I do believe that this is an interpretation zoning code uh 20% if I mean zoning codes are created to keep balance um if if you're say that a 20% minimum is the exact number as a maximum obviously the code was not intended for that for this situation uh otherwise it wouldn't it wouldn't make sense for that um I believe that the 20% code was created for properties that are more Awkward numbers such as 70 foot wide lot 80 foot wide lot so the home does not look like it's an 80ft lot with 5ft setbacks now with that stated I mean we provided our optimal uh amount of space and all the homes around there whether across the street or on the side or the entire area it's a 5ft setback it would I think it would make it more Awkward to to provide a 14t 6in setback on oneide and an and on an inside lot Corner Lots that's typical but on an inside lot I think that is an eyesore of anything thank you Mr R Mr chair Mr have you contacted your next door neighbor any objections to what you're trying to do not that I know of but the item was noticed Mr the item was notice posted and um mailed um notices also went out I'm sorry that the item was um the property was posted and that mail notices did go out great go ahead Mr Maxwell Miss Spain where do you want to go thank you would you be you and the owner be rather than face a denial today um would you be willing to defer this and work with staff to overcome some of these objections and bring it back I understand that you put in a tremendous amount of work but I mean just to put it in perspective and I I don't want to speak for the owner I'm sure they will but I know that there is a little um uh we have been working on this for over a year and we've worked with historical to designate it into historical we proposed addition on in 2022 and we've working along with historical with Board of Architects and the design is uh has been thought out for a long time and as you can imagine it does become a burden on the client to you know uh continue with this process as the way to get the permits approved um and even not you know not even able to live in it because they purchased the property and they're waiting to renovate it um now with theate uh you know I that would be something you know that we can discuss with the client but that's I would there's been no motion yet yeah yeah yeah I I I would be has I mean I believe she's there yeah of course if if you don't mind she's right here too good afternoon if you if you please come to the mic and say your name good afternoon it's the first time that I'm here um name please Monica bu thank you I'm the owner of the house well my husband bought it for me so we can leave yeah we please swear her in no no no no I wasn't the testimony about the should be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes so my my only concern right now is that we've been going back and forth many many many many many times and and it's really getting frustrating because I had to rent the house and I haven't been able to move into my house I have three kids and I want to have like a nice place for them um one just got backed from the University and I have two that are going they're twins and they're in junior year and they're going to the university in 2026 so my request is please give us an idea of when can we start because this is really getting frustrating and we need to move forward he's one of part of the architects who have seen our case many many times and we don't know what what else to do he's been working really hard to get this a the way we have been told but every time we come it's a different thing it's many opinions on one thing so the only thing I'm asking is for want guidance and not to be changed the next time we're happy to do that there's been no motion today so just there was just a question by a board member um okay thank you thank any additional questions Mr BOS yeah can you address so part of part of my issue here my concern okay is that you don't meet the criteria for the variant okay it so you know it's strictly speaking right so you now I do disagree with some certain things that I understand there there is that conclusion by staff yeah and some of it is a little hard to ignore MH so you know can you speak a little bit to it other than this is the best possible solution you came up with a board of Architects and this what you moving forward for no no no it it is beyond that I I think I will address that that it's absolutely I the interpret of that zoning code is not I mean I I don't believe like I stated the maximum side setbacks for that property is 20 ft the minimum is 20 ft I mean that 20% code is not intended for their situation like this that was intended you know and and with you have to keep in mind that all the homes all the neighboring homes being on a 50ft lot are a 5ft setback so to create another 15t setback because it's it's on a 100t block that is going to create a huge gap in in the middle of the street I mean it was it wasn't to avoid that code but I believe if anything this is uh doing it justice for that for zoning code and and what it's intended to be um I mean other than the side of the street you know corner street setbacks 15 ft that's that's the only area that's usually that wide thank you Mr Mr B it's the same answer so miss Spain so that 20% overall side setback has been in the city code for as long as I I remember I was his Z administrator for a while it was very important that people understood that when they started designing an addition and as far as the historic portion of this that doesn't affect that because we're not counting the garage which I think is a given it's pretty amazing that the zoning that the people reviewing zoning wouldn't say no that garage is a couple of feet from it so you need to pull it way back and they didn't do that so you're already getting a break because of the historic nature of the property uh and so I I think that 20% is important it's important for the streetcape of that uh that street and I think you should have taken that in consideration when you designed it my main concern though is the windows um because I think it was in the staff report that you're changing the location of original Windows um correct and are those uh windows that are visible from the yes we do have an outline we will keep the the outline all of the windows that are uh being changed we are placing them within the openings could you put that up again please uh yeah so here are some of the elevations that's the rear elevation um this is the existing any windows that we are installing we're keeping them within the openings the sil will remain in that area um we'll also keep an outline of all uh the window outlines of the original one um another this is this is the front so the addition is different um uh this is also um the side the interior is that the side that they can see from the street no no this is on the interior this is where the pool would be over here this is the front of the home this is this would be the front of the home and this is the existing this is the the home the front of the home this square right here is the addition covering uh the you know what's going on behind it however all the windows will remain you know as as you can see we are keeping the openings in the same vicinity so the windows are not exactly the same they're within they're within the envelope of the existing window yes exactly um we have to reconfigure the interior I I'm sure for the door it isn't the case and the window on the top hello yes yeah that's there's nobody recognized to speak on zo I'm sorry who was speaking on the zoom please um mute yourself until acknowledge we're not at the public comment and if you're one of the presenters please um note that in the comments so we can have you appropriately sworn in or um acknowledged by the chair thank you thank you Mr R um sorry could you repeat the question I don't the the applicant stating that the new windows are within the so exactly the same as the existing windows they're within the footprint or the area of the existing windows no that's incorrect no window not the same they're within so if there's an opening and we're enclosing it if we are placing a window to give you I mean there the plans right here so this is an open opening right here we're if we're proposing a window we are proposing it within that opening right that's what I meant to say okay yeah yeah exclusive of the door exactly uh exclusive of the door and now to to keep in mind that we don't have any existing plans uh for historic anything that was used were the drawings that I had done by existing you know by measurements so and all all those windows and doors on the side so so the real response is that original openings are being modified into smaller openings um or being adjusted to meet the new floor plan so I think that's what you probably read in my report portion and that um we would recommend you to look back at that to study where you can keep most of the openings and there's also like the sleeping porch at the back that those have the bigger like um the bigger openings that the well now is on A3 is the is the Cabana bathroom I think is what you're looking at where the sleeping porch was where there's two larger openings and so those are all being minimized to just one window within that Mr raal can you go to A3 please oh yeah that one no that' be A4 A4 Maybe a no I'm looking at A3 okay A3 is no that's not Mr chairman Mr Silva if uh it's a little difficult to see on the presentation but if you look at the package A3 they I think he's drawn the existing missonary opening is dotted and you can yes see the two it's it's hard to see it's hard to see on on the display and on the plans all the existing are outlined uh we will they were going to maintain the recess of the opening and then keep the modified opening within that space right thank you Mr Miss B I got it I understand all right I don't know why A3 is not showing thank you Mr raal any additional questions for staff or the architect I have a question for staff before and it goes away sorry so um on a non-historic house is typically um you know a good strategy to add the way this one was added to but since this is so so towards the front um is that one of the comments or discussions you've had with the applic yeah so I had um initial conversation with them um when they were going through the boa process like they mentioned they were identified by boa to be designated so they had actually started the process before come getting landmarked um they there was concern with how far forward the the the that the addition was and how it competed with the length of the original and so that was something that I had brought up a few times and talking with the designer the architect I understand kind of why he was using that section of the building to maintain the projecting piece without trying to push it back because if you had to push it back then he had to re make the opening from the to the for the hallway through that projecting piece um and then kind of alter that side elevation a little bit more so there was discussion on that about where exactly it would land if it's too far back then you really don't have a backyard and so it's not an ideal location where we would typically allow and trying to create some sort of transition between the old and the new is what what we were trying to push for um while they were going through the boa process and then um the boa did support this last application at the at their last hearing and if if you don't mind I can also address if uh I don't can we have the slide back up if you thank you okay so um this is the existing home this is the foyer area um our addition we step back on almost you know 1 and 1/2 almost 2 ft and then we do another step back so we are recessing as we go along um I mean so from the front to where the addition is there there is optimal space you know from the setback um and maybe I can go to the site plan that you can see it so this is the front you enter the home this is an enclos space so I mean our addition is way back and we set it back twice and this is uh yeah that's where the side issue has is thank you Mr raal any anything else any questions all right thank you very much um we're going to open at the public comment does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor in opposition to this case anybody on zo yes I'd like to Yes um can you get on camera yeah I don't have permission oh if cgtv could please allow what is your name on displayed on zoom and you'll need to be sworn in as you were not here um earlier 230 the comment is the the username is 230 uh Steven Harley Steven Hartley cgtv could please allow the camera on and if you could please be sorn in Mr heartley as soon as that pops up sure I I was sworn in initially oh you were sworn in earlier okay um we would still need you on camera for your comments sure cgtv cgtv can we see stepen Hartley please he has controll yeah yeah thank you here we go than you Mr heartley please proceed with your comments and please state your name and address for the record before you begin thank you my name is Stephen heartley 23 Alo Avenue I am uh I live in the property um directly to the uh directly to the east um I have uh I grew up in the in the 236 uh alato address that's is being reviewed now uh my parents purchased it before I was born lived there all my life uh um sold it to the current owner um and we're very happy to see them coming in and improving the property the design looks looks very good um definitely uh happy with it um I am concerned uh with with the setbacks um it is very tight um looking at the design helps I will say that um I think there's even less than there's not a whole lot of room already on on the side to our property line um and it is very tight the property 236 property already has um already approaches on the front facade um on the facade um and that's just the way it was designed originally um it is is uh further forward than any other house on the Block um it also as as was noted uh encro is on on seta on the West Side um and I am surprised that the garage wasn't addressed um because that's almost directly on the property line just a few feet off uh and again that same I'll call it garage outb building um encroaches on on the uh on the rear on the South Side uh so there's definitely a a whole lot of room on that property already to build a beautiful home um like I said the design as I saw it I really don't have objection um there was a uh there was a window missing on the uh I think it was elevation A5 on the uh on the East facade on the upper right on the um that window was was om the design which is fine I don't have objection to that also there's a Crest that I want to make sure stays and that's on facade it wasn't shown in the design I'm sure it's covered in Stow but it's there um but as for the setback it is a little close um I'm happy to see that it's one story and not two uh as long as the is met I don't have a a whole lot of objection my main concern is once establish another can can build um you know something not um so that said I don't have any other comment just that it's a little tight on the uh on the East uh on the east side um but we do want to see the owner move in we really want them to you know come and improve the home thank you Mr heartley um we're going to close the public hearing and bring it back to the board any discussion amongst the board members thank you Mr R okay any discussion on any yeah Mr Silva I'll go go first so this one is is a little more difficult for me uh than than the one we just heard as regarding the setbacks um for a couple issues right uh number one I think the other one clearly met all those benchmarks right that that we talked about that as a requirement actually of this board um this one I'm not quite so sure right it's number two the other setback variance request dealt with flat work right we're talking about pool we're talking about things that are not threedimensional uh this deals with the massing of the house right putting a little closer than than than is permitted um the the garage for me the the existing garage is a big issue for um we talk about trying to save those where we can hand and not penalizing owners for these things existing in the back corner in this case you are not being penalized for the garage because it's being kind of disregarded so what they're looking at is the setback of the front of the house which is you find that condition everywhere right there's tons of houses with a 5 foot and a 15t setback on 100 foot lot that's that's pretty typical um and it's it's the zoning code is written that way to allow for some variance right so you don't have just there's some variance on on site placing that there is kind of this consistent Green Space in between houses right um so to me I I think I agree with staff in that you don't meet all these requirements um but I I don't have issues um with the the fenestration replacement on the existing I think kind of as a concept the design is is is is well thought out um I don't have an issue with it being pushed so far forward because I think that preserving that that pop out makes sense and I think the elevation is a little deceiving the elevation on A5 let me see um because you're taking just the side elevation let me but you actually read that volume much more because there's Beyond this this this tall flat roof MH um yeah there is there is a pitch Mr H there's no this is just board so beyond that there's a there's a pitch roof and you read that volume all three so it makes sense the way that house connects I think and and preserves that that massing there um I think there is a simple solution I think if if the applicant is willing to to look at kind of shrinking a little bit we're not talking a lot right I think you can take a little bit out of that family and dining a little bit out of that kitchen and if you need to you can extend a little bit farther forward and not change your whole concept not change your whole design but I think it's fairly easy moves that you can make and and and comply with zoning and and and have the house that that you that you want um and just a question for staff sorry if I may um if we pass a motion today that that denies the variance but sort of approves can't do it you can't do that that's not what's before you so you can so would have to be a deferral Ori approval or denial approval or denial and does that okay so if we defer but they if we defer they don't go back to the board of Architects they just come back to us well so it's going to depend on how they end up responding to your request right right thank you thank you Mr any other to Mr BOS but I mean I think I think the request from the applicant and from the uh from the homeowner or anything else is you know tell me how far you're going to pull the pole and don't move it any further right so give me give me a concrete resolution I think I I would agree wholeheartly with Mr Silva's position I'm not and I don't know what what Miss Ban's position is but I think I'm okay with the way that they're handling the windows I think most of the time the windows are not I mean the openings are there right it's consistent with what they're trying to do I like the design I think it's a beautiful design I mean it's missing the rollsroyce but other than that you know it's it's uh it's it's very nice I just I what I hate is to create a situation where we're granting a variance where there's no hardship or there's no there's immediate criteria and then we're creating not creating a president but we're we're we're giving a special treatment to some degree without it edting the requirements to have that special treatment uh and I don't think it it it's fair to everybody else who shows up here or for notti meet our duties but my only object my only um suggestion is perhaps it'll be more advisable than rather than deny it for us to maybe defer this item okay allow them to go continue to work with staff just move as Mr Sil said just move this it this this space to the to the um a little bit and I think they can be back here and not waste you don't waste more time or money on on whatever the these folks want so they can finally build their home so that would be my suggestion if there's no other discussion to defer the item I will move for that but I don't know if anybody wants to speak on that thank you Mr V Miss Alvarez I just have one more comment on the windows and I I agree with the comments from Mr s Mr B so the windows especially when you look at the sheet A6 um you get all these different configurations for the for the lights um I know you mentioned there were no M there was no microfilm original drawings and you are there's some departure from the original window sizes but I think typically there's a kind of strategy where you find a similar proportion um cuz I think right now when you look at that sheet in particular it stands out that some are vertical some are very horizontal some are square and I think that makes the proposal more disjointed and also if if you continue um in the direction of the kitchen on that uh end facade I don't know what the orientation is um you end up with a very blank facade right now it's just one window so I think that has to be studied as well especially towards the neighbor um you usually we discourage like just blank walls um what you're ending up with there I just wanted to add that to the thank you Miss Alvarez M Rando yes um clearly the applicant does not uh meet the requirements for a variance I think we've got us whether you can you can perhaps debate one or two of the criteria but uh where the applicant is supposed to comply with all of them so I am not comfortable approving this variance I do have some concerns about the um addition uh I'm clearly in the minority I think it's um too massive and um too kind of monumental I am appreciative of the fact that it's one story not two do I think it's attractive yes I do do I believe that it fits here not really but um I'm I'm not the design professional on this board uh so I I um I don't think it's appropriate to Grant a variance here otherwise we're going it's going to look lot line to lot line that um that is not appropriate for this neighborhood uh nor um and I'm hearing what the neighbor is saying here as well so um I'm not going to vote to approve this thank you Mr Lando any further discussion I just how long is that family room how what is the length of it so Mr raal that's a specific question could you come up and answer please I'm sorry I apologize I've been trying to figured out it's 15 ft wide uh and it's uh uh 10 ft in between the column so I'm thinking it's like 30 25 30 15 by 30 yeah let me tion construction huge room you're the actual room you're looking I was going to say the entire Edition is for I'm talking about just this family room I think there's plenty of room to reduce it I can actually pull up now this would be an easy fix yeah I mean uh yes so it comes out to 40 I'm sorry it's about 28 ft 28 28t and that that will combine um uh 26 to 28 ft and that would be the living room and the dining room and I do I do want to mention one thing the property line does angle out so it's not only adding 4 and 1/2 ft in order to meet the all sides side side back would be 5 and A2 from the front Okay um because as it angles out we're going to have to meet that you're not asking for us to move one foot or or half a foot because of the awkward ordance of the No No that I'm saying in total asking for like 4 and 1/2 ft almost 5T so you know like if the variance was move half a foot on the side because of the aers of the well there you have maybe hardship and you're doing something I get that okay but here it's chunk okay was that a question Mr B no no yeah I was giving feedback how about that thank you any other discussion amongst the board members um so I I have some comments and then I'll I'll sort of pose a question to the applicant um the I appreciate the argument the applicant is making with the minimum 20 maximum 20 with the um it's going to be five and change and then at least 10 uh so there are other buildings if we're smaller lot it would be slightly it would be 5T possibly or smaller numbers in actual dist um but I also appreciate Mr Orlando's comment is the building's going to be longer it's going to be a bigger building on the Block uh and the reason we have a 20% setback is so that there is a proportional relationship between buildings and sites whether it's 5 10 15 or 20 feet um so that's where it gets a little complicated but I I I have to say I really do appreciate the argument the architect is making um I also agree with my colleagues that I think um it's it's something it's self-imposed right this is something that the the applicant and the architect has done in order uh to meet criteria that does not meet the zoning um criteria and maybe some of them as Mr lond said maybe not all of them um having heard our discussion um would the applicant be amendable to a deferral or do you want an up and down approve or denial today and I'm asking prior to any motion being made by the board thank you for being diplomatic so we the the applicant is um amenable to doing lots of things so I will now open it to the board does anybody wish to make a motion would like to move to defer the item Mr BOS is making a motion to defer the item to the next possible meeting out we we have to reset we have to do everything right so we'll just defer it we can defer it and if it's the next meeting it would be the next meeting and we don't necessarily need to Ren notice we'll look at it but if the applicant needs a bit more time we may or notice requires more time we'll let you know is it um well I'm just I'd say the word continued but I don't know that to be possible Miss benas um if we use the word continued does that change the the motion in any way no you can continue it to the next meeting that's fine and if they're not ready the next meeting then it can be continued again okay so that means we have we don't have to Ren notice if it's continued if it's contined to a date certain we do not need to re notice just so the October 16th meeting at okay so can can the is the Mover willing to continue this to the next meeting I I'll amend my motion to continue to next meeting supposed to and Miss benness what's the date again October 16th okay we have a a motion to continue this item to the meeting of October 16th is there a second yes second so there's a a motion by Mr B as a second by Mi Mr Maxwell any discussion does he understand that some of us won't vote for the variance I don't want him getting out of here thinking he can just make it less I just are they been through so much we should give them clear instructions sorry Miss SP hold on hold on Miss Madam City attorney yeah so just to be clear this continuance means this exact same item will be coming back for you at the next meeting if in the meantime there are discussions between staff and the applicant and a variance request is for a different number for instance or a very different um uh COA there may need to be Ren noticed obviously you guys would need to get the plans Etc what what a continuance does is brings back this exact same item and this exact same request to you next time to the extent that there's a modified request for a variance that would require different noticing Etc so I think the applicant has heard your feedback today and we will work with them on any noticing or publication requirements if needed then then I have to deferral would be the same it's if you're not deciding today you said that the variance has to be the same variance so the item that was noticed was a request for the 10 ft were 14 or I've got the numbers wrong there but this specific request so if there's a different variance request for instance 2T they redesign the building that's 2et it may need to be Ren noticed I I'll need to look at that then I'm going to make a Mr sorry what about if it's zero feed just to clarify that right if they remove the request then then that will come back before you and they will withdraw the request for a variance that that's does it have to be Ren noticed no if the item comes before you again and they are no longer requesting it we don't need to Ren notice it so the public would be aware that they had requested a variance and are no longer requesting it that's fine so what would happen in October is the applicant would come they would request withdrawal of the variance and request the COA for the addition without the variance which presumably would be modified so to no longer require the variance are you you you're clear it's either we continue it and you come back with the same number or zero zero VAR or we defer it and do this differently no understood and I understand that coming back with the same number will be a d understandably now I do have one question no I just want to make sure you're clear yes okay so yes please ask your question um relating to the garage uh there was some talk and discussion about certain things and we also don't want to have issues later on where zoning Flags it and states that we need a variance for it now it is a part of the historical structure itself it is somehow connected also with an arch to the existing building um what do we do in that situation we're not modifying it we're not stated in the report it is not part of this application I did not get any no no we're not pretending to so it's not included in this perment but some of the comments were stating that there could be a denial so we'll reconfirm the the setback requirements for with zoning to make sure that that is being identified with the 4 foot7 is the accurate number so the again that's I to clarify is the application we have before us is pretty clear to us okay and you have the option of either coming back with the same number or zero if it's any other number it's got to be Ren noticed and you've heard the board speak course so as long as you understand what the intentions of the board are yes I think it's clear now miss Ban's trying to be incredibly clear but that's why I had all the discussion first so you can hear all of us give our opinions we've had good practice with Board of Architects for the last couple months so we're clear yes thank you absolutely any other comments from the board before we take a vote I believe we are lacking a second oh I'm sorry we are was no we have Mr Maxwell okay apologies we have Mr Maxwell okay great we have a motion for a continuance by Mr Bano segment by Mr Maxwell please call the role Miss Alvarez yes Mr Excuse Me Miss Rando yes Mr Silva yes Miss Spain yes okay Mr Manos yes Mr Maxwell yes Mr Garcia Pon yes motion is continue to the October 16th meeting 7 to Z thank you very much um so we have one more item case File CP 2020 4-28 an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 1407 Ferdinand Street a local Historic Landmark legally described as lot one block 67 Carl Gables Granada section according to the plat thereof is recorded in plat book 8 at page 113 of the public records of mday County Florida the application requests design approval for additions and alterations to the residents and site work thank you I am nearly out of of water and cough drops so I'm going to talk really fast to you all location map for the property on Ferdinand Street North Milan Avenue this is not going to last um is a photo from the 1920s a fishball photo it's a unusual house and that the entire uh second floor in the front that you see was a screen sleeping porch um since enclosed it was permitted in 1925 designed by Martin Hampton it was designated in 2005 so they are requesting approval for an addition uh and alterations to the property approximately 284 Square ft um there are no variances being requested as part of this application it was approved um I think that data is wrong by the board of Architects with a condition that the new roof thank you overhang is to match the existing um and we did have a couple of uh staff conditions as part of uh any condition uh MO to approve I will let the architect give you his presentation good afternoon my name is Jim Smith I've been before you before um some of you I know some of you are new faces to me but um thank you for thank you for having me finally um just a little background before I get into the presentation um we're very familiar with this this property my firm and I were involved in having it designated in 2005 um we worked with the the staff um Cara probably was there at the time Adonna might have even had a hand in it but um we got the designation at the time in 2005 we actually for the previous owner planned the addition that um was um deferred by the client That was supposed to be built in 2007 um that client felt that this was going to be there forever home they were transferred to Chicago sold the house to my client who I inherited who I'm representing here this evening and um they in fact built the vision that the previous owner had um was some modifications a little bit of expansion that um added an addition in the back I'll start the my presentation in a second um this addition that we're proposing today is on the second floor um there was um through a series of things including the pandemic and then a couple of things that we discovered we had our shoelaces tied together Zoning zapus for the addition being more than 25% of the original home they locked us into that even though the original house had a garage in back that had been demolished with the authorization of of the of the city we tried to pitch the fact that the original home including the garage should be counted in that square footage that went nowhere we completely redesigned the second floor Edition to be half of what it was and probably the least that the client could tolerate so five years later this started in 2019 5 years later I finally made it almost to the finish line so I'm I'm here tonight to to share that with you um I have the I have the staff's um recommendations and we're pretty we're in agreement with everything there and some of the things we had actually overlooked that we had considered 20 years ago as conditions of the approval so I I'll go through that um very nice house um fairly wellmaintained the um the home is in the I guess the north section of the gables 14th Street or so near 8th Street um the an Arial view um right about where that where that red spot is on the on the Google Map is where is the area of the addition that we're proposing it's in the rear of the home and it extends to the to to the South to the bottom of the page um so that the structure can span and be supported by the walls um these are some of the F numbers we are nowhere near the maximum limit for lot coverage isn't changing F numbers unfortunately we are way under what the f would allow but we're restricted by the ordinance that we were not aware of um restricting it to 25% um this um I took a picture of this just this past weekend and included it in the PowerPoint this is from what we can tell I don't know if it's original but it's the the um principal texture of the of the stule on the building um this is what we did to differentiate working with staff the last time we um we have the addition is a little bit different texture it's a little U stroked where the existing is more stippled um and then also you can see the difference in the two textures on the on the right hand on the left hand side of that of this slide um I think we did a a fairly decent job differentiation the tube and having it not look like chalk and cheese um this is the addition that we did 15 years ago I'm sorry in 2017 that we planned 15 years ago this is the east facing portion of the the house um this is the kitchen side with the casement windows by the way that I'll I'll address here in the comments this unfortunately is the Second Story east facing elevation as it exists and as it was originally planned apparently um our our addition will cover this um Bring It Forward um 12 ft and then span across to the other side of the house um the this is the window that was written up by staff um what we did because this addition has taken so long want to get to this far the client working with the window contractor the client called me and said I want to get impact windows in the house we're going to take the whole house window provision out of the application we went back and took it out of the the the the um permit plan and we didn't um and and this window um was the only one that remained we we are now um proposing that we don't change this window opening or modify it we're going to if it's included in our plan set or if it goes into the window permit set that's been already applied for separately it will be a casement window size for size in that opening following staff's recommendation um again unfortunately this is what you see I I kind of walked around the block this house is is um the house the yard that I'm in that I took this picture is um on the corner that's that's the the mostly you're going to see now that's what you see now of the um of the existing from the southeast perspective um these two plans side by side they're a little bit different scale but on the on the left is the existing site plan and the second floor plan on the right you can see the addition which is the extension in the back and the hip roof that goes to the South this is the existing first level this there's no change on this at all um again here is the existing and proposed second floor again all of this is on the east side of the stair on the east side our original attempt original plan had been to extend the addition all the way to the front and make a real decent master bedroom so now what we only thing we've been able to do is we're going to add a study they're going to using the existing bedroom as a master but they now have a a better master bath and closet and that's what this was about um this is the uh front elevation um that is existing and proposed um this has been to the board of Architects Board of Architects basically had no this has been at the board of Architects a couple times because we showed them the grand scheme thank thank you very much and um this is the the modified scheme that [Laughter] that we had no um we had no comments really to speak of from from the board of Architects this is the um this is the unfortunate North elevation at the top those windows that are shown in the addition will be casement and we'll work with staff to get that with the one of the I think those can be casement and still meet egress that um staff we'll work with staff to make that happen that the size of that opening will not change and the bathroom window has men before is either going to be in or out as the casement window in our plan so um this is the rear rear elevation that you really can't see from anywhere but it's it's a lot better where that that the one window that was a real narrow window well that now is a wall forward and that will be also be a casement window um the front elevation will will both be casement um I'm sorry the rear elevation at the top of the of the of the um slide that I'll work with staff to make to see if we can use a single casement on that narrow window which is I believe in the in the bathroom but we'll um we'll address all the staff uh comments same thing on the south um the South elevation the new window that's shown there on the only projection will be casement that's my story today so thank you Mr Smith okay if if you'd like I can um address the points the staff made but I think I've kind of cross you said you had no issues with you were fine with the conditions AB thank you thank you Mr Smith okay great any questions for staff or the architect are there original drawings of the the original House in particular the Eve um I feel like it's missing a trim or something happen there it's been boxed out over over time and a board of AR and a board of Architects they they asked us to to make the addition that we're doing now match what's there so is is that what you is that what you want to do because that was the only comment that we got from the board of archit it's all their fault it was overrated is you have a recommendation yeah what do you have a recommendation or question you going to disagree with the board of Architects please don't make me go back I mean there's a photograph the the 26 photograph that's there I don't know if there were exposed w after ends there looks to be like it's boxed out but maybe not as dramatically as it is now yeah looks boxed out does look box down right but it's it seems a bit more dramatic maybe the color I don't know if it's different but it it it's definitely you know this house existed a long time before it was designated so yeah um is the existing roof being re roofed as a result of the addition it will be and one of the conditions is when we do that um that it conformed to to I said it would conform to the staff notes which was that it be the true two piece two-piece Barrel tile which we're doing I'm just I'm just wondering if there's an opportunity to correct that you know as part of the re-roofing if it's if it's basically just a box out on the outside and you're you know you don't get into any complex structural changes to the roof um it's just a shame because such a nice house and then it seems like that that boxed out Eve seems out of place um it was there before us so no I know but now you're extending it I mean I I can try to zoom in on the picture and the actual photograph and see what it's you know what what I can see but I I you know I don't see I don't see rafter Tales at all yeah I know in the picture it looks like maybe it's just it's dark um paint but maybe it had AR we couldn't find many reference yeah plans or mm thank you Miss alas anything else oh and the similar comment to the last project I feel like um the window mon configuration needs to be looked at somewhere well have that combination it will change with the casements so so what happened was as I was writing the staff report I got an email from the window company saying hey we just submitted our window permit for the rest of the house us yeah so so there is a window permit in place or being applied for for casements throughout the house that match the original um so we asked that they just sort of coordinate between that set and what's happening here so that you know they go together so we and we will do that so the conditions by staff would cover that yeah okay good any questions by the board to the staff or the architect all right thank you so much um open the public comment does anybody in the public wish to speak in favor or opposition to this case anybody on Zoom hearing none public comment is closed bringing it back to the board any further discussion I'm going to say I think it might be any minority on this but part of what I have an issue with is and and there isn't much that maybe they can do with my thought process but what if done over time it's that they have sort of made the house boxier and I think it's a real shame that the that the open um uh the Terrace that they had on the top that was enclosed and I believe this addition what is doing is perpetuating the same damage that it was to to to the house before okay so it in my view it really detracts from it that we are expanding the cutout okay that comes from the back that we're making it longer because it it does the fact that it it cuts a little further in does actually make the house look distinctive and it and I just hate the the the addition to the side on top of the house I think it detracts completely from the front so I mean I I I can't I don't see it I I think it takes away from the house and he it perpetuates the same issues that they had in the past on making it uh more boxing it in it completely changes the design and the the historic nature of it so thank you Mr Vanos any additional discussion I'll make a comment on on the west elevation I think I understand your comment but I think the architect has pretty well so I understand but I think they they did a fine job I'm a little surprised that the 25 whatever the zoning thing was but I don't even understand that but but that's not what's here before us today so we're just going to go with what we have um I can give you the short version if you want to know okay um okay any any further discussion on the item anybody wish to make a motion I'll be happy to Mr Maxwell what is your motion I'd like to make a motion to I'd like to motion to approve with the conditions stated in the report by staff numbers 1 through 7 on the design proposal for the addition alterations to the residents of 1407 Ferdinand Street and the seoa I'm sorry oh I'm sorry I didn't see that okay and approv the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the design thank you Mr Maxwell you have a motion any second second second by Mr Rando any further discussion Motion in a second let's call the rooll Miss Alvarez no Mr Manos no okay Mr Silva yes Miss Spain yes Miss Rolando yes Mr Maxwell yes Mr Garcia P yes motion passes 5 to Zer congratulations No 5 to2 5 to2 sorry I two here and I said zero 5 to2 um thank you so much that concludes the agenda um of the items we now move to Old business or is there any old business the board wishes to address I do have one item of new business actually let me go Miss penas is there any commission items you wish to share with us um yeah so wait let me go back because where do you you want to wherever you want to start like um so we have the discussion item for the city hall repairs and assessment but I could do the city commission update just to mention to you all that there was um a a discussion item last meeting about doing a centennial project to highlight the properties that are also celebrating their Centennial the year of the city and creating some sort of special plaque or Medallion or something that will be added to um the design the those designated homes so working with the um Communications Department and Martha pantene's team to figure out how it will work and um and what it'll be so more to come on that thank you um and then the other City commission item is just there has been discussions obviously about City Hall which comes into our discussion item about um you know funding the future re re restoration project and um and then the immediate repairs that are being done which was circulated to you all in advance of the meeting some of you did the walkthr with me today individually and um I'm here to answer any questions you may have um I was was hoping the ACM could make it today but I did provide you all the link that he gave the update on um we have gotten some we have a meeting tomorrow actually with the manager's office to go over some of the updates received from the engineer and how those will be addressed but of the items in the immediate action list um some of these have already been taken care of all the wire MH has been installed where it needed to be installed and um the anywhere that there would needed to be built Shoring it takes a little longer because there needs to be plans that are associated to that so any any questions for staff regretting the discussion item great anything else miss Ben well new business I suppose since you brought it up yesterday you can't have a bigger smile on your face Mr chair uh it's been a year since I I've been the chair we've been asked to um the position is open for is an annual vote um I am going to remove myself from consideration for chair for the upcoming year um so we're going to take a couple of votes one for chair and one for vice chair we'll do it slowly so um we're going to uh does anybody have any does anybody wish to um make a recommendation of chair does anybody wish to put themselves forward for the position of chair I would like to recommend Mr Maxwell as the chair so there is a request for Mr Maxwell to be chair does Mr Maxwell accept the nomination yes okay that's one does anybody else wish to be nominated or nominate anybody else as chairperson can ask Mr Maxwell again do you want to accept the okay so we have a nomination for chair Mr Maxwell um do we need motions and seconds or we take votes we can take a voice vote I hear a nomination for Mr Maxwell is there a second second second by Mr orando all in favor I yes I any opposed hearing none Mr Maxwell is the new chair of the story preservation board um can I do the vice chair okay so now we have an opening for vice chair since Mr Maxwell is the chair is there any nomination do anybody to nominate themselves for the position of Vice chair I would like to know my name is Orlando actually Mr buos I respectfully Decline and would suggest instead Mr Silva okay I like to Second Mr the nomination of Mr D Silva if he would be kind enough to accept so we have a motion by Mr Rando and a second Mr Rox for Mr Silva Mr excited everybody would you be in okay Mr Silva would accept it we have a motion and a second for Mr Silva all in favor I I for vice chair uh any opposed none motion passes unanimously okay that is the last item um let's a journ motion a journ thank you very much thank you for your service Mr Garcia P we really appreciate your services chair know thank you m Rolando you know no one is trying to be sexist up here we we'd really like to have a Balan so yeah what what's with do for e e e for