##VIDEO ID:5o-Z9HTUUFk## [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] for [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] please take your seats the meeting is about to begin remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record please stand by we are going on air in 5 4 3 two [Music] one good morning everyone um and welcome to the uh December uh 17th edition of the Miami Beach historic preservation board meeting I will um get this meeting started by handing it off to uh Debbie tet uh good morning everyone good morning members of the board um one quick announcement this morning we we will have six members present uh board member Lindsay Lovel will be absent today um we have a relatively brief agenda today um one quick another quick announcement is that there is a uh land use and sustainability committee meeting later this afternoon so we will need to conclude um between 1:30 and 2: p.m. but I think given the the length of the agenda that that should be um pretty reasonable um with that I'm going to turn it over to Mr Steven rothin uh from the city attorney's office um for any City attorney updates and to swear on me any members of the public uh and the the lobbyist registration notice sure good morning Mr chair good morning uh board members and good morning public that today's meeting of the historic preservation board has been scheduled in a hybrid format with a quorum of the board physically present in the commission Chambers at City Hall and applicant staff and members of the public appearing either in personally or virtually by the zoom platform in order to participate in today's meeting those wishing to participate via the zoom platform may dial 888- 475 4499 and enter the webinar ID which is 817 4834 7488 or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 8174846886 um mention that and uh also I'm going to read into the record the notice regarding the city's lobbyist registration for those that are appearing on behalf of a business a corporation or another person you will need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office if you haven't registered yet you should register before you speak to the board you do not have to register as a lobbyist if you are speaking only on your behalf and not any other party or if you are testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific technical or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting or if you are appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any compensation or reimbursement for your appearance to express support of or opposition to any item expert Witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall prior to appearing disclose in writing to the city clerk their name address and the principal on whose behalf they are communicating if you are an architect attorney or employee rep presenting an applicant or an objector you must register as a lobbyist these rules apply whether you are appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage defeat modification or continuance for those that are here in in chamber um if you could please stand so I could administer the oath do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth okay thank you and for those members or for those attendees that are appearing virtually I'll swear you in one by one uh before you address the board and thank you thank you Stephen uh Mr chair the first order of business this morning is the approval of the November 12th 2024 meeting minutes does anyone have any edits or do we have a motion motion to approve the minutes okay all those in favor okay thank you that was approved um the first application on the agenda this morning is HPB 24693 um this is for 8336 Street commonly referred to as the Southshore Community Center um this is a possible designation of a historic site a presentation um by the city's planning department to the historic preservation board of a preliminary evaluation and recommendation report relative to the possible designation of the Southshore Community Center located at 833 6 Street as a local Historic Site um just briefly we we have more detailed background in the report but on uh September 11th of this year the mayor and City commission uh voted to initiate the designation process um for anyone who's listening or who may not have this information the designation process is actually quite lengthy within the city um the first step is the initiation of the request uh the city commission is one of the eligible parties to to make such a request um and then we are now on the Second Step the second step is to present a preliminary evaluation so staff's initial findings to the board regarding uh whether or not we believe this building meets the criteria for an individual Historic Site um um if the board during this meeting uh determines that it does meet the minimum qualifications then we staff would be directed by this board to prepare a formal designation report that formal designation report will be more detailed um and will be presented to the board at a later date the requirements are is that that that designation report be transmitted to this board no greater than 12 months after um any direction to move forward that we received today um staff will then present the designation report that the board uh at that point would make a recommendation the recommendation would be to both the planning board and the city commission whether or not to move forward with the designation um this would also be then reviewed by the planning board as a zoning map change to designate the Historic Site the planning board would issue a recommendation to the mayor and City commission and then ultimately it would go twice to the mayor and City commission first reading and second reading um the second reading would be the formal adoption of this as a historic site so it is quite a lengthy process um this is the first significant step in in our review um and just the the report is is more detailed um but I'm going to give a brief summary um the Southshore Community Center was built by the city it's currently owned by the city of Miami Beach um in between 1970 and 1974 so one of the reasons why um it was constructed was during the 1960s we had a significantly growing elderly population um with the city recognized that and actually received a grant from HUD um to construct a community center um primarily focused on seniors so in 1968 the city commission selected a city-owned parking lot at the northwest corner of Sixth Street amerian Avenue and actually purchased four adjacent lots for the project um in 1969 moris Lapidus and Associates was selected as the project architect um and in September of that year the city had a groundbreaking however it was not until 1970 that construction bids were received and the fundings became a aailable for for the construction of the project um during the construction the Western Wing of the building was actually omitted due to a lack of funding for that portion of the project um and the remaining portion was completed in 1971 I mean excuse me in 1970 in 1971 the city was able to allocate additional funding for the project for the construction of the West Auditorium Wing um which was completed in 1975 the Southshore Community Center is highly characteristic of the brutalist style of architecture um the plan has three parts it has a symmetrical two-story Central volume that contains uh offices at the ground level and activity rooms at the second level a one-story Auditorium Wing is located to the west and a one-story Recreation Wing to the east uh covered walkways from Sixth Street lead to a concourse through which all areas of the building can be accessed and an exterior Monumental stair leads to the second level um below the stair is a multi-level water feature that water feature is not operational at this point um and it is surrounded by built-in planners the original location the original design of the building Incorporated uh distinctive architectural features and finishes um and this you know is is one of the more significant features architecturally of the building with its rough uh board form concrete finish a smooth concrete finish exposed concrete blocks um all in a stacked bond with rake joints um so again all of these features are are significantly um characteristic of the brutalist style now with regard to the ordinance criteria for designation um staff has found that four of the criteria We Believe believe are either satisfied or partially satisfied um one association with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the city the county state or Nation um we believe this is directly associated with the um urban renewal policies of the of the late 1940s in which Federal grant programs Pro Federal programs provided grants to municipalities um it does body a distinctive characteristic of a historical period it is highly indicative of the brutalist Style and what makes it unique is it's somewhat of a human scale brutalist building um a lot of brutalist buildings that we see throughout myate County at least are more Monumental in scale and this is this is more at a human scale um we believe it possesses or at least originally possessed High artistic uh values um however we have noted in our report that significant and distinctive features of the the building um including the exposed concrete and related finishes have been severely compromised uh they have been painted over at this point in time we are not sure if that paint could be removed um we're hopeful that it could be but we don't have that information um and finally we believe that it does represent the work work of a master um serve as an outstanding or representative work of a master designer architect or Builder um this building as previously stated was designed by Morris Lapidus U Morris Lapidus is um one of our most celebrated architects in the city uh has many buildings that are currently within local historic districts as contributing buildings as well as buildings that are that is a test for everyone um including buildings that are are listed on the national register of historic places as individual historic sites most notably the fonton blue Hotel um one of the other considerations for designation uh is that a building structure Improvement or landscape feature may be designated even if it has been altered if the alteration is reversible and the most significant architectural features um remain intact and repairable we believe this is part par Al satisfied um the community center does retain um some degree of architectural Integrity however as previously noted there have been um some pretty severe alterations including the the painting of all of the exposed concrete as well as the enclosure of that upper level right so that open level um which we have a photograph I think there's a photograph here um on the on page six um that kind of open Breezeway level has all been enclosed um there's also been you know some securing of the site and some enclosures at the ground level um finally we are required to review all historic designations in in compliance with the sea level rise criteria um we have noted that this building is is highly vulnerable to the impacts of sea sea level rise um it is one of the lowest points in Flamingo Park um Meridian Avenue has a a elevation at this Sixth Street in Meridian Avenue of about three ngvd so the Sixth Street side is 2.81 so that's even lower and the Meridian side is 3.12 um so that is a significantly low elevation even for the City of Miami Beach right I mean all of our elevations are low but that's that's um significantly lower um than other areas of the city um based on the the survey that we were able to find the finished floor elevation is approximately 5.66 ngbd where the required base flood elevation in this particular area of the city is 8 and gvd um so we do believe that the proposal May in conflict with some near midterm and long-term efforts to increase the resiliency of the city with respect to sea level rise um but we've also noted uh that the building potentially could be modified um including building elevation uh to further the city's resiliency initiatives so that's just something that that is required for this board to consider as part of any historic designation um and and we wanted to outline our initial finding regarding the sea level rise criteria but based on the evidence presented in this in this preliminary evaluation we do believe that the site meets the qualifications as a historic site and we are recommending that the historic preservation board directs staff to prepare a formal historic designation report for the proposed Southshore Community Center historic site which we would bring back to you um at a later time that's all all I had but I'm more than happy to answer any questions that's it that's it thank you Debbie that was really very thorough and um as well as concise so because it's a lot a lot of history what's that of course I I I will go right down the list I'll start with Brian who said he'll have a question I'll go right down this line and then we'll finish with Elizabeth um Debby I just thank you for that um amazing summary of the of the history there I wanted to to just ask in terms of this possible designation How would how could this potentially affect other buildings that were designed by Lapidus or or others in the city and maybe could you give us a little bit of a context about when a designation you know when this board decides to make such a designation um I guess just potential impacts that we may see in the city with with other buildings that are are in a in a similar position perhaps um that's a great question so um you know we had and we outlined the history we had previously evaluated the building as potentially a a change in classification as a contributing building um that when staff evaluated that had more in our opinion uh had more potential implications due to the fact that this is a brutalist period building which includes you know the 1970s up until the late 700s uh we do have many buildings within the Flamingo Park historic district that were built in the 70s a lot of those um while they haven't been fully evaluated are the more typical housing um midrise buildings with a huge parking deck typically underneath the building um that in in staff's opinion aren't contributing to the sense of time PL in place of the district so we were concerned that that would have greater implications that if this period became part of the period of significance for Flamingo Park that a lot of these older in staff's opinion not architecturally significant buildings just due to the fact that they were built during that same period and are indicative of that period good or bad um would need to also be evaluated um we're having we're having a significant uptick in a lot of buildings from the late 1960s through the the late 1970s that had are going through 40 recertifications that have these concrete balconies um and we were concerned that that kind of capturing all of those buildings would lead to issues for for a lot of those those older condo buildings in the future which are in in which are also by the most part non-conforming buildings right they are out of scale with the district they're out of character with the district um there large emphasis on parking in terms of the site plan is also significantly out of character with the district in terms of its pedestrian quality and and and character um this proposal is for an individual site designation which is is is more um specific to this property only um when staff evaluated this property yes it's it's a Morris Lapidus designed building and Morris Lapidus is a highly celebrated architect not only in Miami beach but really internationally at this point but it was more that it it is a very unique brutalist building for the City of Miami Beach it does have that pedestrian quality to it um and I think that limiting it to one site specifically does not have the repercussions for you know to open up all of these these buildings during this period um we do have a lot of Lapidus buildings within our local historic districts we actually have an indiv a separate historic district named after mors Lapidus between uh 43rd and 53rd Street on Collins Avenue um but because this is an individual site it's looked on as a caseby casee basis it's not capturing all of those all at once to to consider for future designation it's very site specific and would be you know any future proposed Historic Site would be evaluated on a Case by case basis yeah that that's really helpful I was actually just I mean I live on Bell Isle so I was thinking like just what the potential impact would be there because I know there you know a number of buildings that you could perhaps make the same argum arent so I was curious about that precedent and thank you for for um you know giving us uh the the background on that thank you um Lord no sorry did you have um Debbie by designating it as a historic building do we have to does it have to conform to the flood elevation it does not it um but we have the sea level rise criteria to consider for any historic designation um you know that's one of our our biggest concerns about this building and it has been you know for the past few years um when we evaluated it previously it's very low um Sixth Street and Meridian and Jefferson are also very low in this particular area of the city um but it certainly do doesn't preclude you from moving forward and ultimately for the city to designate the building um we do point out that you know we don't know exactly what's going to happen in the future but I think we have a pretty good idea of the trajectory of of what waterers is is going to do to to our city if we're not proactively raising flood proofing and making alterations to not only our right of ways but also privately owned property in this case government owned property um will likely need some modifications um in this case probably some significant modifications to the ground level um in order for it to be resilient has that been discussed at all as to what the modifications will be should we have to we haven't looked at that yet um you know to to be quite Frank with you staff is not in a professional position to to make recommendations as to what would need to be h what would need to happen it's a very costly proposition I mean we're talking about 2 and 1/2 ft yeah it's it's significant um Endeavor or even other just to piggy back off of Haskell's Point even other examples of other buildings that have had a similar um you know the two and 1 half ft and what Solutions there were there and if you could just maybe is there any background on that of of things that have been uh recent buildings that have been raised in the past that we can at least have in our mind we have seen structures that were actually elevated um structurally this is probably Mr my would probably know better than me um more unique we've seen um some buildings from the 1920s for example which probably have very different structural systems than this particular building um be raised um the fact and most of those have been residential buildings or single family homes um the fact that this is a nonresidential use may be beneficial maybe um you know just just as a lay person's observations maybe the ground floor could be opened up maybe the ground floor doesn't need to contain space um that that people would be actively using or any sort of critical electrical or mechanical equipment Maybe it could be wet flood proofed and opened for the water um the area around the site including the sidewalk in the streets may may have to come up um currently the future the future crown of road for this area in sidewalk would likely be higher than the building site so it it would create some some complications um but if you look at you know the city um raised 11th Street Street um just north of the of of this property you know you can see that some of the the sidewalk and is is above a few of the buildings and you actually step down into buildings those are actually residential buildings making it even more challenging um but there there potentially could be things that could be done it's just um likely that alterations are going to need to occur to raise the building I don't think would be cost effective at all I mean we're talking about a structure that wasn't designed that way uh and to your second point to uh abandon the ground floor we'd be losing all that floor space essentially right for use but more importantly to me this whole thing is tied together I think there was conversation earlier about the fire station being relocated there uh the one that's on Jefferson I think right and now there's conversation about this fire station being moved over to Flamingo Park which I think is really outrageous to be frank with you you know Flamingo Park has been around for a long time it's got a storyed history I track and to enclose it with the fire station I don't think the two are compatible so I wanted to just digress a little bit and ask you about what is the status of that fire station on Jefferson because all these components are linked we're if we're going to designate this as historic we're not going to be able to relocate anything to that site where do we stand on that issue because I passed by just if if I may have another moment I don't see any major issues with that fire station why are we talking about relocating it it's been there for many years it functions it's provided numerous services to the community why are we talking about relocating So the plan for a new fire station fire station number one which you're correct is currently located on Jefferson Avenue um was part of the city's geobond project initiative which was approved by the voters so the city has allocated a budget for a new fire station I you know the fire chief is not here um but over the past at least probably seven years the fire department has been advocating for a new fire station um there's a the list of reasons that I have heard I'm not equipped to speak to those in any detail as to why the current fire station is inadequate for the city's Public Safety needs um but that has been stated by the City's Fire Department that the current fire station is not adequate for for our life safety needs um so there is a project and this is you know more of a a policy decision as to where the location for the new Fire station's going to go um up until this year the city had selected the Southshore Community site as the new location for the fire station there was actually a project that was brought before this board um after a lengthy debate at several meetings uh this board approved a plan to place a new fire station in this location while preserving some very limited aspects of the Lapidus design and incorporating those into the new Fire Station um since that time we have had a change in policy direction from the mayor and City commission to stop the planning for a new fire station in this location um so that call was made by the policy makers and then shortly after that in part of those discussions the idea of potentially putting a fire station on the very western edge of Flamingo Park was was discussed and debated um that because Flamingo Park is a regional park it is over a certain acreage required a a ballot question it required the approval of the voters countywide so it was a countywide um ballot question that ballot question passed and the city commission has has currently Direct Ed the administration to work with our Design Consultants on feasibility of placing a similar not the same plan and design for the fire station that was previously proposed for Sixth Street to the very western edge of Flamingo Park there there there are no final plans for that um I have not seen um any real Dimension plans I don't think there's a final decis decision made that if it works or if it doesn't work there is not a final approval that it will definitely be at this in this portion of Flamingo Park um it is something that the city Administration has been directed to explore with our Design Consultants to see if it's potentially possible to place it there it just sounds to me like a whole waste of a lot of money doing studies and hiring architects for something that currently works if we were to leave the fire station where it is we'd leave the community center as is and we leave Flamingo Park as is I would say we'd save quite a bit of money for this city no need to go through all this entire process that's my take on it so in terms of supporting this project there's a historic building I wouldn't support it at this time because it's tied together to all these three components Flamingo Park the fire station and this and this site uh itself so I think we need to have a little more discussion as to what we're going to do generally where this city is headed in terms of those three components before we can decide on this project okay thank you H um Ray just to add on I was on the board three years ago when we we did approve the site for the the fire station and they were uh maintaining many of the parts of the original building as part of the design they were even bringing uh a sculpture from fyen that's been saved for years and putting it on the building the city has spent an inordinate amount of money to get to this plan now why did we take so long number one when you ask why we need to move the fire station at all the original fire station was built before we had all those high-rise buildings south of fifth we do not have proper Fire Equipment to take care of a fire in those high-rise buildings that's the reason you need a new fire station number two Flamingo uh uh Park was was rejected originally by the flamingo uh Park Association as having a a the fire station in the park then we come up with this location which I think was the fifth selection uh that the that the fire department went through trying to find and now all of a sudden we're back to Flamingo Park and the Flamingo Park residents don't really want it there I've been by that site that's very narrow I don't see how they're possibly going to have it without it being up and over the track um to me we cannot designate this property as historic until there is a new Fire Station built and the city has made a commitment to return it back to its original Condition it's not right now it's a bastardized building many features are gone and we can talk about returning and whatnot but to me it's not historic unless you're able to do that and the city makes the commitment to do that uh and so I would need to have a lot more information from the city before I could personally vote to make this a historic site thank you Ray could you I I just was trying to take some notes on what you were saying uh you said we cannot designate this without it but what was it in that without knowing where the fire station is going to go because we still have a planned fire station for that location there's no reason that it couldn't come back there if the city can't really build it someplace else so once you designate this as historic they're going to say oh well now you can't do that to me until there's a new fire station I I I personally can't vote to designate this as a historic site we have spent an inordinate amount of taxpayer dollars and we have nothing to show for it okay thank you uh Laura did you want to add anything um Mr chair just sorry to interrupt uh we do have members of the public wishing to comment okay um so it's up to you when you would like to hear them well let's finish with board comment um be and I guess this is kind of an unusual case but we usually go through board questions with staff and then we'll definitely take anybody who's uh wants to talk in uh in public because there won't be another presentation that's the presentation okay perfect um Laura thank thank you so much um I I really do appreciate um this the staff's recommendation um but I do tend to agree with my board members that a lot of the elements um although reversible which is noted in in um staff's recommendation they're not they don't hold the standard of authenticity um currently as is um I do think that the general form of the structure obviously the location Etc setting um meet the criteria so I I am inclined to agree that at face value it is a historic site um but I do think that it you know the the beauty of this board is knowing the intricacies of um the community um the local very hyper local community so I do think we kind of need to understand what the what the process would be Beyond um a potential designation for this site okay thank you Elizabeth did you want to we in yes um so when initially I said oh that's um a great building why not designated as historic but as we're talking about the C rizon the need for resilience and my concern is we are just kicking the can down the road and by designating historic today in years ahead we'll create another problem on how to um allow this building to survive C level rise and I think given the the points that Trey uh presented and I was not here three years ago when the other fire station was debated but I think we have too many pieces uh in the puzzle and they are not very stable at this point and I think it would be better to understand where they all go and what's the better location for everything because once we designated this building as historic it will never be able to accommodate a fire station in the future and I think we need to evaluate those options a little bit better under the light of the lack of um future resilience of this building and how to resolve that so um I think we need a little bit more information and not information but studies in terms to understanding the implications of this designate the historic and in the long run how we allow this building to survive and how we accommodate this fire station and the Flamingo Park and uh all the constituencies involved in that decision thank you um did you want to say something more okay go for I guess this is a further question for for staff um was and forgive me for not following all the details of the kind of what what's been going on on the in the political world here on this but was there was it contemplated that there could be a revamping of the fire station and a part of the parking lot that exists I believe on the site that that with those two entities that there could be enough space to accommodate the new needs of South the fifth with new equipment and whatnot and what were discussions around that if there were any I I believe it's a 21,000 square foot lot um that we're talking about which which is a pretty big lot obviously are you talking about the Jefferson lot or the existing fire station is yes so we and you know I haven't been been a point person or or directly involved in this but we I along with our Capital Improvement projects um office have been looking at possible locations for a fire station for for probably 10 years um the first the first analysis and study was done on the Jefferson Avenue site in terms of could we use that site to build a new fire station um could we modify the existing building and expand it for the new fire station that site is is very comp complicated because there is a a I think it's a waste water station and pump there which limits um in a very severe way what can be done on that site so a good portion of that site cannot be utilized due to our infrastructure that's that's currently there um one thing I do want to point out is that staff in our evaluation of this the Southshore Community Center did not take you know all of these other things into consideration my recommendation to the board would be not to take where new fire station going to go into consideration my recommendation to the board would be to evaluate the proposal in accordance with the designation criteria which is what your mandated to do now there's also been points regarding the sea level rise criteria we are also required to evaluate properties based on a sea level rise criteria um but while there's a lot of of you know ideas and and uncertainty over a fire station project for South Beach um I would caution the board to not you know put too much weight on that because ultimately that's a pol policy decision we don't have a definitive plan at this point I don't know when when we will um but to evaluate the The Proposal based on the criteria um can I ask and then we'll get to the public uh but I just wanted to ask um a reminder of where we are in the process because this came to us in as um as a a a mandate a question how would you refer this from the from City commission can you describe kind of what our role is here sure um this came to you basically as a referral so the city has initi the city commission initiated the designation meaning there's an application for the board to consider this as a possible historic site so there is no requirement or mandate other than the fact that the Board review staff's preliminary analysis of the site in accordance with the required criteria and make a a determination so you are being asked to make a determination as to whether or not to move forward with more detailed information for a potential Historic Site designation so right today would be do you want to move forward or not that is solely in the discretion of this board whether or not to continue this process or to stop the process and if uh it's voted by this board to stop the process is there is there an appeal uh an appeal option by the commission by the city commission I do not believe the code provides for an appeal of a preliminary evaluation so I I don't believe there would be any appeal possible and would there be any um option say this board rejects the um rejects the the rejects moving this forward is there any option for the board at a future time or the commission at a future time to reintroduce the referral yes I believe it would be um I know if the if the designation report is voted down it would not be able to come before you for 12 months I believe and I would like to confirm this with Steven or Nick cleris most likely um if the board declines to move forward at the preliminary evaluation process if there may be a 12mon waiting period but to answer your question yes in the future this could come back before the board at at either the request of the board at the request of the city commission the request of the planning board mdpl there's certain entities that would be able to bring this back before you in the future question for Debbie wait first Elizabeth and then and then Ray and then can we def um can we defer that decision to a later meeting yes the continuance can be made up to 120 days um the continuance can be a total of 12 months can we ask for additional information to be presented at that later meeting or that's not the space for it now yes you could uh Ray and then Brian uh Debbie um why do you think that this wasn't brought up three years ago when this uh particular property was scheduled to be renovated Into the Fire Station torn down in saved parts and why is it you think now do you think that this was brought before us to try and make sure the fire station could never go back there and that's the only reason it's before us so I I don't know I can't speak for for other people in terms of why they're bringing this before you I can speak with staff's history with the project which is extensive as that you know our recommendation has remained consistent in terms of the fact that we do not believe this building is a contributing building which was the previous request we have pointed out the significant concerns with regard to the building's elevation as well as alterations that have occurred to the building over time we are currently looking at this building in a different light in terms of the criteria for an individual Historic Site which is why our recommendation is solely based on the criteria and not you know all of this other chatter that's going around and all these other different initiatives and um you know possibilities Brian um I guess I'm just I was is hoping that you could give me a little help or give us a little help here um I concerned about the circumstances related to the resiliency and the sea level rise and so I'm wondering in your mind if if we were to hypothetically continue this item what other kinds of information could we receive from the city and other stakeholders and professionals to understand a little bit about what those modifications would need to be um to hasal point the the cost the potential costs of those modifications I know that we we are our purview is is is on the designation but as um you know as some of my my colleagues have said I think that we we do a very good job of trying to take into account a lot of issues that are going on in the in the community and potential cost ramifications and I I just want us to look at this pretty holistically so I'm curious if you have any um guidance there on what could be offered to us in a potential future meeting um yeah and I think that's a great point so I am aware and we can bring you back a lot more detail that the building had received a 40-year recertification um and additionally I believe it was a 50-year you know now it's every 10 years I believe they went through more recent certification um there have been repairs done to the building through our Capital Improvement projects office I believe facilities May our facilities management division may also be involved so we could I could certainly reach out to the different departments who have actually um performed repairs on the building and who are much more knowledgeable about its current condition than I am um I could ask them to provide us some information and perhaps attend a future meeting to give you more information regarding you know the existing structural condition um and in what they see potentially in the future for for resiliency upgrades that may need to happen all right uh I think um so I think we're going to do this where we had our opportunity to just ask questions and get this out and then we'll listen to the public and then we'll come back and we'll have our conversation is there anybody in the public who would like to speak yes Mr chair um on Zoom we have several uh members of the public our first speaker is Johan Moore good morning Johan good morning Debbie uh and uh board members um Mr I need to um sway you in do you swear or affirm that yes correct do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do okay and I'm going to set the clock 2 minutes um for you to address the board great thank you very much thank you uh Debbie for all your Clarity um that goes without saying I also want to thank Ry uh for his Clarity on the need for a new fire station there has uh never been disagreement I think from within the neighborhood on the need for a new fire station uh it cannot accommodate modern up-to-date equipment uh it does not permit uh driving through the fire station uh and the building in fact seems to be rather moldy uh the adjacent parking garage twostory structure that some may have assumed a city property is in fact the property of the condominium across the alley and so it should not be in your minds considered as a part of this um I feel for you having to decide this based on the architectural and such criteria rather than on the surrounding social issues but this building is Central to our Community it is a loadstone of our community uh it is it is very much at the heart of our community and its social functions are what is as important to the community as its architecture I wanted to address a couple of the concerns though that came up um City uh staff has been made aware that the West drain in the adjacent parking lot is inadequate uh fixing that should help protect the building uh when the site was designated for the fire station we were promised an adjacent injection well and City staff is also aware that that is currently an orphaned project um but all issues potentially with injection Wells aside uh it might be a way of addressing this finally I want to point out that under the US Army Corps of Engineers obligation to conserve cultural resources uh within the context of the back bake project uh funding can and will be pursued more aggressively if this body and or the city commission uh chooses to push for it for federal funding uh to be requested by the White House in 28 is the next chance uh that would permit buildings in the historic district to be elevated uh and that I think is is a is a practical forward-looking answer to the otherwise rather alarming question that was implied which is how is the city going to come up with the money uh for elevating such a building I'll leave my comments at that I am disheartened that there was not unanimity or majority support for this and I urge you to put off a decision I think stakeholders uh in the community and otherwise will have more information for you that can help you make a fuller decision at some point in time in the near future thank you very much thank you Johan our next speaker is David McKinny Mr mckenny good morning good morning hi I just need to sway you in before you address the board yes thank you okay do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay I'm gon set clock for two minutes for you to address the board uh let me introduce myself to those of you who do not know me I Am David mckin I'm an architectural historian I hold an Ma and PhD in the history of architecture for from uh University of Virginia and recently uh presented a paper at University of Miami at a national conference on the importance of this building to the career Mark Mars Lapidus and on the architectual landscape of Miami Beach uh I have to say I'm disheartened and disappointed that the um uh board has already decided um it's uh uh there and made known its votes before hearing the public I think it's a disservice to this to the city as a whole uh and basically THS the the whole uh purpose of public comment um I will note that uh in the importance of this building uh has been noted and and uh brought before the historic preservation board by the Society of architectural historians and the State Historical preservation uh Florida State historic preservation has named it as one of its buildings to save uh I have to disagree professionally with the staff opinion about the paint for a building this age not to have paint on uh on it uh is basically uh to uh say that you you have to uh have a building uh in Christine style the moment that it is uh opened uh before it can be preserved paint removal is not a difficult uh thing there uh aspect and should not be a reason for you to decide against this building uh I would sorry uh Mr chair may I just complete my yes you have one more minute David um there this building really has a national implications it was a national model for his their uh recognized by both the US Senate and by the White House conference on Aging when it was created it's uh if you look at uh uh their Schnider Morris apst architect of the American dream it is featured prominently in this monograph which is the probably the best monograph on Morris lath uh there to date so if you uh decide not to designate this you building you're basically going against um not only the historic preservation code of uh Miami beach but the the whole tide of architectural history for this for uh both the city the state and the nation thank you thank you David okay our next speaker is commissioner Tanya bot good morning everybody can you hear me yes good morning commissioner um I will need to sway you in as you address the board yes do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay and since we've given up the call is three minutes Mr CH shall I set the clock at three thank you Mr chair if you don't mind um extending a little bit of latitude um in case this goes over three minutes I wanted to um address some of the questions and concerns that I've heard uh raised I won't belabor the historic significance of this building um that uh professor excuse me Dr mckeny just laid out because I couldn't do it any better than him um so a lot of the questions that I'm hearing being discussed are policy decisions and and issues rather than the pure merits of the significance of this building um I've been running point on this um issue the location of a new desperately needed fire station since the first commission meeting exactly a year ago and I can tell you that we are very far down the road um we had a robust conversation um with a number of stakeholders not just a conversation process with a number of stakeholders um in the South uh South Beach area to identify potential sites that were not the Southshore Community Center I think we vetted eight or nine um that were suggested by staff by residents um and we had very specific criteria the best option was the site in the on the easternmost edge of the Flamingo Park um it had to pass a countywide referendum um and it did with 75 plus per including an average of close to 75% in every District every pre syn in Miami Beach including Flamingo Park so let's let that snc in there was not a single Precinct in Miami Beach not even Flamingo Park who did not approve of this location for the relocation of the fire station the next issue and it's a concern is can we fit the fire station that we need which is a category 5 rated Command Center um along with the newer bigger equipment necessary to service the newer bigger buildings south of fifth into that very narrow little strip on the eastern most edge of Flamingo Park can we do that without affecting the track and field and the answer is yes we have worked with Engineers um working on this project they have confirmed that it will not only not affect the track and field but it will be um f further away from the track and field than the existing fence that is at the easternmost edge of the track and field in last week's commission meeting we unanimously approved the change orders to the contracts for the um The Architects and the engineers and all the folks who are going to be working on this project so that we can begin um re-evaluating and redesigning the new fire station for its new loc on the Eastern Edge uh on Alton Road that is work that is starting there is no additional alternate fire station location that is possible I know that there is a magical thinking wish floating around that we can buy a Walgreens that would add 20 to30 million to the cost of the project if we were even able to find a Walgreens for sale in the right area because remember at the end of the day it doesn't matter if it is placed on a lovely site that doesn't serve the the um residents and the neighborhoods that it is required to serve the fire chief chief Virgil the former Fire Chief and our current fire chief uh Chief abello were intimately involved at every step of the way to find a new space and they are 100% supportive of the new location for the fire station the fire station location is set we are moving ahead we have had a number of open houses and events at the community center and I would encourage you if you would like to come visit it I would be happy to arrange it the building is Rock Solid it may not be to everybody's taste I had somebody write in to me to say I don't know why you're trying to save it it's not very pretty and I never see a bus tour stopping by but you're all on this board because you know that architectural history and significance isn't always everybody's idea of aesthetically pleasing David mckin laid out all the reasons why this is such an important building not just aesthetically and architecturally but for the culture and the history that it was built to serve and which it represents and it is being reinvigorated and reclaiming its space in the community as it was meant to before it was put on life support about six years ago the senior lunch Services Program is restarting within the next couple of months the daycare no longer needs to be relocated it has continued uninterrupted we last week at last week's commission meeting authorize the city to start planning for a summer camp program to be held there the police department is going to be moving some of its training facilities to the upstairs which will not only enable that part of the city to have a vis visible police presence but will also allow the police department to do the trainings that it does at City at their um headquarters like self-defense classes for women and the Police Athletic League to hold their boxing classes for kids there there's going to be room for um uh a number of not for-profit organizations there is a um a robust interest from the community there's a committee being formed to help guide the kind of soft programming so what happens in the evenings what happens on weekends yoga class commissioner can you can you kind of wrap this up please a little I'm almost done good I I just wanted to give you all the information you've been asking about the the community center is Alive and Kicking and robust and the only work that it needs is replacing the elevator which is normal standard repair and I really urge you to please consider purely on the merits of the the historical building your vote for designating it thank you thank you all right um yes there's another person okay one just popped up actually we have two that just popped up um our next speaker with the initials krg good good morning good morning everyone Hi I just and members of the yeah I just need to sway you in so do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I hope so yes okay great and Mr chair how long should I set it for the commission uh initial three three minutes per I know how how many how much time do you need commissioner um I wasn't able to hear the conversation although I've started to receive text messages from people across the community and they are flabbergasted that after after all of this effort knowing that the majority of the commission really appreciates this building that this board is not going to complete the designation I'm shocked uh you know because it is a a form of Brut ISM and I know that commissioner bot showed several articles around the country explaining that experts experts um are that this is a an example of of Morris Lapidus why would we take a a a unique building like the Southshore Community Center that is thriving that has a daycare there is so much excitement there the neighborhood loves it Barbara hulanicki is going to repaint it and there is no appreciation um for it from this board and I and I honestly I'm gonna really I hope I would I would ask you to defer this item because I think we I need to sit down with each of you and show you some of the Articles written on the center and possibly try to change your minds because I think that this is just wrong and really it's a slap in the face to me commissioner Dominguez all of us who voted for it I think the last vote was actually a unanimous vote so by ignoring us and it just shows that there's no respect um for our opinion that's how I feel right now very disappointed thank you commissioner okay our final speaker is Daniel Caldo Daniel good morning good morning hi I just need to sway you in before you address the board do you swear or affirm the testimony that you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you so much and good morning members of the HP board sorry I can't be there in person this morning um Miami Design preservation League enthusiastically supports the designation of the Southshore Community Center is a historic site it is a significant structure designed by Morris Lapidus and it is long served as a community Hub we have worked collaboratively with stakeholders over the years to preserve this important building and we're pleased to see of receiving formal recognition of its historic significance within our district it's also nice that the 40-year recertification has recently concluded ensuring the safety of the structure in the near term now as far as a recent discussion it's a very uh informative and um uh I I do believe though that we have to expand our thoughts about sea level rise and resiliency to also include today's residents of our historic neighborhoods not only with a single-minded focus for the future residents this is a community Center If This Were in Venice Italy how would you respond to the fact that it's 2 feet below the new construction flood level all that is being talked about is a fire station or the relative level to new construction NOAA 2022 prediction is 1 foot sea level rise by 2050 and 2 feet by 2100 so we need to have charts with these buildings and with the projections we need to take the abstract to the actual in order to stop this impass that we keep having on decisions so I would ask this board to please protect the community center and that saff do a better job to explain the resiliency and the benefits of a community center today it is in conclusion it's amazing that there are even some members of this board who recently spoke in support of unlimited building Heights along the coast when it's about new luxury condos on the Ocean's Edge it's Bill build but save a community center sorry sea level rises coming thank you very much thank you Daniel does that conclude our public yes all right well that was quite a public um a public contribution to our our committee meeting and um I want to open it up for the discussion of the board and what we do and I I did want to kind of um I hadn't yet kind of expressed my opinions on this um and uh my my opinions before all of these comments was that the I didn't think the staff report went quite far enough to talk about the potential of this building as a historic as a historic building I I belong to the 20th century Society in London which is a which is a pionering society that's to save historic uh concrete concrete buildings um in Britain but uh and so I consider this to be a kind of a pioneering um kind of step for the City of Miami Beach to take in terms of preserving a building moris Lapidus and I also I also live for a while in Brooklyn Heights where many of you guys know Cadman uh cabman Plaza North is a um is Morris Lapidus building of the same period and so if you understand how those buildings are used and how they're set within historic context you kind of see this building as I imagine uh others would as part of a context of a historic you know District in that case it's um it is a Brooklyn height is the historic district and the um the Lapidus buildings are kind of addressing addressing that and so um I was very gung-ho about this and I also I also believe that buildings from the 60s and 70s and and bruist buildings have a place and those buildings that are raised off the ground and have the first habitable floor above parking are some of our most resilient structures and have the potential to really be and I know my students even my students never want to uh take them the next generation wants those buildings they consider those buildings to be they talk about the railings they talk about everything and so I I I consider this to building to be an opportunity for the city and this these were the notes that I took for myself before this whole conversation and it never occurred to me to think about this in the context of all the other stuff that's happening around it but I understand that all that's all happening and that's all part of what what we're thinking about but just as a building itself it it's it's an opportunity to um kind of pioneer uh the preservation of a of a so-called brutalist building um that you know with exposed concrete or painted concrete and it's an opportunity also to show how a building for the city to demonstrate how a building that's set low into the ground will be able to be used and anticipate being flooded it's not that anybody's going to be living there and they beds going to float out the door it's that they will be able to anticipate these floods they'll move things and I'd like to see the city show private property owners who also many of whom suffer from this same elevational challenge um kind of what some best practices are so I thought if the historic preser if a historic preservation can if historically preserved building can be a model for the future uh of preservation that that's a really kind of exciting place to be so I was um I was all set I was a little um I was all set for this uh for this to be a kind of conversation about pushing possibly um the the boundaries of what we consider to be historic in our city um and you know given the fact that one of our most celebrated Architects moris Lapidus you know as as um has been pointed out um David pointed this out um you know he built buildings before you know earlier near the war and then after the war and the other thing that's interesting about this building is that we were um you know studies uh this part of Flamingo the Flingo Flamingo Park historic district and it's fascinating that the this is a response to the young people who moved into the art deco buildings um in right after World War II so the 1940s buildings the 1930s buildings it's those same people who are aging in place and so the idea of following Community Aging in place and celebrating a monument to that Community Aging in place I thought was was just kind of an amazing an amazing moment for the city so I was totally I was totally supportive of it um going going into this and uh that's I I understand that some of you are not ready to or have expressed that you're not ready to um to support this so um I would be ready you know obviously to accept a motion to to continue the conversation because we're not we're not approving it today we're just asking for this process to move forward um but seeing that there are maybe more conversation that needs to happen among board members so um that uh maybe you'd like to anybody else who would like to chime in you're welcome to do so ran and and so Brian and then Reay oh okay um so let's let's do um let's complete public uh comment before we do board so why don't you why don't you we'll just do that first because I think we'd like to talk as a group about including your conversation thank you so much Mr chairman and uh thank you to the members oh hi good morning sir I need you to sway you in sure um do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do and if any of the um board members had any questions about it the city commission voted for this so they are the applicant so that's um why you're hearing from Commissioners normally we don't hear from Commissioners on applications but in this particular uh instance the city commission is the applicant and also um your your ruling should be based upon the code uh not influenced At All by who the applicant is in this matter yes and thank you Mr attorney for that uh I come here because I do respect highly the role of the historic preservation board as the experts in historic preservation and uh and I respect the work that you all do your Independence and your objectivity in making decisions based on the criteria set forth in our city code and I would always encourage you to to do that um as someone who who has joined my colleagues uh commissioner Rosa Gonzalez commissioner Tanya Bond um in in fighting for the preservation of this important uh building I stand uh before you in support of designating the Southshore Community Center as a historic site a designation that would honor not only its architectural significance significance but also its profound contributions to the human fabric of the city of Miami Beach you you already know the uh the the history of this building uh built in 69 or designed in ' 69 by Morris Lapidus and um and you all know the great work that he's done with our glamorous hotels whether it be the fountain blue or the Eden Rock but the Southshore Community Center stands apart as it represent an evolution in his work embracing purposeful form of modernism and specifically as you mentioned U Mr chair brutalist architecture which is often way too often misunderstood uh but its bold conrete design reflects the strength and the functionality of this building which was never just about Aesthetics alone uh this building as I understand was all about serving the people who needed it most and that is precisely what this Center has done and has done for decades and hopefully will continue to do for decades uh in in our community um today it's it's an important part of of embracing its history it is still serving the community today and and it has the opportunity to contribute to the needs of our community in the future and while there's great debate about about other needs in our community about facilities Public Safety facilities that we need in our community we need to learn how to coexist the future needs of Public Safety together with the need of preserving our history uh especially the opportunity to per to preserve this brutalist building when we have not had too many opportunities to engage in designation of this specific style of architecture so I stand here before you um just to share my opinion of how important it is to preserve this building it is a unique style that uh it often takes time to appreciate um but anyone who has been through this building can tell you the functionality and the beauty of this building truly is in the inside of of of its walls from the outside it just looks like a concrete structure from the inside it breathes light uh you see the outside and you see the functionality of spaces where the community can be embraced and continue to serve the most underserved in our community whose fabric uh and whose contributions we need to preserve thank you Mr chair and thank you committee members and I think we may have a fire in the building that's a fire alarm thank you thank you very much all right so I think we've closed public comment and that was actually applicant response so um Ray you look poised to say something okay um I have really no problem in designating this as a historic building if it's returned to the original condition that Morris lab has built and if there's not a commitment to do that I can't say that this can be a historic structure I have no uh I mean it is a very important building it it has a lot of function for the community but so did the 21st Street Recreation Center on Washington Avenue that got torn down because the convention center wanted to expand and all those Services got repositioned someplace else so I'm just saying you know like I I understand why the commission wants to save this building and I do believe it has architectural significance and I also think since uh it was brought up by U commissioner Fernandez that the interior is most important I think we should all be giving a tour but for now I think this should be continued thank you yes BR um I think just in light of everyone's comments perhaps we could if it's possible maybe I can make a motion I I just want to Echo um my colleagues on most of the points and thank you for for the commission for for giving us all of that added detail and that context about um the decisions that you know you guys have been confronted with and I'm sorry um you know to the extent that I haven't been following all of the you know various um various events uh I I would like to propose a commit uh a motion to continue this this item for 3 months I think or a few months however many months you know the city staff can help us in making a decision look I I don't want it to be mischaracterized at least on on my um you know behalf I I do see um you know the architectural and his historical Integrity of this building I think that the brutalist um architecture the concrete finishes the ribbon Windows the staircase the you know the central water feature those are all things that um certainly resonate with me and uh however I would like more information and I think it's fair to get more information to raise point I would like a tour of this building I would like to understand from a data perspective how this building is used in ter terms of usage metrics um to understand how the center currently serves residents and what and the quantities and the metrics around that um and then I would like to understand the assessing the repairability of the compromised architectural features or or not you know to commissioner bot's point if there if if there if there are if it's not an overwhelming you know amount of repairs Then I then I would like to know that that is the case in some sort of you know assessment um especially as it relates to expose concrete or water intrusion or all those other things um yeah and then lastly I just want to kind of take a the pulse and to to to talk to the Commissioners I would love to speak with commissioner Rosen Gonzalez and others um who I've not had the opportunity to speak with one-on-one to have greater conversations about their vision for the community center so I would just like to place motion on the floor that we continue for perhaps two months or 3 months however many months Debbie believes that we can perhaps give us some more information to make a decision so is there a second to that motion I'll second the motion okay now I'd like to discuss the motion with Debbie because um there are a few factors I just want to make sure Debbie is okay with like all of your the request because the motion's pretty specific there's a tour um more information about the um how about the materials it's origin the original materials materiality of the building the repairability of features and Ray also had an an additional ad which was that the building I guess right that's the yeah I have another question just to throw in I'd like to know how many other buildings in the city of Miami Beach that are historically designated like the bass Museum and and you know like that I want to know if they are I mean I don't even know that it's in my neighborhood so Ry was asking how this would compare to its other sister single singularly uh designated um buildings because this is this is um technically outside of the histo the Flamingo Park historic district is that correct well it It's contained within the Flamingo Park so it's already under the review of the which is why you know the previous project came before you because it's it's already under historic preservation jurisdiction because it's located within a historic district um we do have um you know a couple dozen individually designated historic sites um some of which are in Flamingo Park we do have Old City Hall that's an individual site that's also contributing to the district and same with the with the bass Museum that is a contributing build in the district due to its period of construction and its continuity with the character of The District so it this would still be in the Flamingo Park historic district um and if it moved forward would also be individually designated similar to Old City Hall right it has two designations it has individual and it's part of a district um and I also had so since we're talking about this motion um I had a question about whether the information that's being requested is um would be part of like say say we vote to to have a new it would basically be having a new um kind of Report with with some extra kind of features to it and have a a tour and the tour would have to be individual or would it it would have to be individual right we couldn't do it as a group if we did it as a group we'd have to notice it as as a sunshine meeting of the historic preservation board which would then allow members of the public to also attend that meeting um we could do either one yeah um we could you know I could certainly reach out um to the appropriate uh City staff to arrange individual tours or um a single tour okay and what do you think about the um the idea of three months is that yeah 3 months would be the March 11th meeting and that is within the 120 days um so I would recommend it be the March 11th meeting okay and um since it um yeah is well I did want to see if we if we I don't know does anybody have um I'm still interested in in in having this information come back to us and having us have the tours and everything as but I'm also kind of interested in the project moving kind of keeping staff working on the designation report for us like overall to see if we can have some motion on it understanding we need to have this information obviously before we vote on any designation or anything like that um is there any is there any stomach among this group for um for a motion that would that might um that might uh ENC that might support the moving forward which is what which is what we're the re recomendation is just like continue with the um uh where is the recommendation uh direct Department to prepare a formal historic designation report for the proposed Mr chair um you do have a motion in a second on the deferral or the continuance of it so that does take uh priority so I'm still considering this to discussion of that okay of that first one thank because I know they'll they'll be vote we'll vote on that too um but I just want to as part of the discussion about this first vote I want to see if there was a you know if anybody had stomach for this other for this other option just to see if it weighs you in yeah Laura did you have something you wanted to say oh go sorry Hass did you did you have your hand up oh excuse me um I think objectively it meets the criteria for a historic site where previously it might not have met um for a contributing structure so I definitely am supportive of the um more research moving forward forward but I understand the concerns of the The Wider you know project and the feasibility of actually restoring the site so personally I do think objectively it meets the criteria of historic site H did you want to say something else yeah I was just going to add to it Brian had said I think we just take one step at a time make this initial motion where we get this initial information then we'll make a more informed decision later on as to how we want to proceed not encumber staff with additional studies or so forth just get us what we want at this time we'll go from there all right um Brian a yeah I mean I just in closing I just want to say I'm not you know if if if there are those who are who are listening right now thinking that we're trying to kick the can down the road and we don't you know somehow are supportive I I'm very open-minded to a potential designation but I don't feel like I have the information that I need um this pause isn't about stalling progress It's about laying a stronger foundation for the decisions that we make as a board together and so that's why I believe it's necessary did you want to weigh in Elizabeth yes um I just want to clarify maybe what I said before and I do appreciate all the comments that we heard from the public and the education I received on this building and it's not that I I'm I'm I'm in favor of the historic designation of the building but I think we need to look at buildings not on um specific site specific we have to look at the city as a whole and have like a a kind of a master planning or a bird's eyee view look at things and I think that's why it's important to understand a little bit better how this building plays among all the other buildings that have been storic designated in the past and may be more buildings in the future and I think we have a responsibility with these buildings once we designate them historically we need to be prepared to preserve them in the future so that's why it's important to understand from a master planning standpoint what the implications of one more building that will be under our responsibility to preserve but yes I appreciate having some additional information and it's I think the building merits the designation we just need to understand a little bit bit better of the moving pieces and I would just add that I I totally agree that we would definitely need more information before ever designating this and agreeing to the designation I think more of information would come from the designation report and the work that the staff were basically asking them to do the work that they need to do anyway to get the information I so um so I would not support the idea of of the delay at this point but I will but you're you guys are we're going to vote and see how that goes and um but I'm totally in support of of getting more information before we' ever vote on a designation I think everybody on this board can agree that we would need that at the tour and everything like that so anyway with that um do you want to call uh we've got a a motion in a second sure I will call the role uh I'm sorry thereby can you clarify what's the motion at the table now and debie do you want to try to summarize my motion proposal because I I didn't quite understand what you're proposing versus the what's on the motion my proposal just before Debbie gets into what's on the table my proposal is to re is to take the staff's recommendation plus the recommendations of everybody on the board for the information that they need including the tours and things like this um so that we'll be more up to date but just but keep to keep the staff moving on this um if possible is that the proposal but no no the vote is the vote is to wait three is to is to um continue for three months and well Debbie you you can tell us what um my understanding is the motion is to continue this application um to the March 11th meeting and during the time between now and the March 11th meeting to arrange uh tours for board members of the building and also bring back at the March 11th meeting um additional information with regard to the existing uh condition of the building any repairs that are required to be done to the building an initial feasibility and then in Ray this is to your point if the building could be restored back to its original design I don't know how much detail we're going to be able to get with regard to that um but I think for certain we could bring you back some information as what would need to be do done um to restore the building back to its original design um and then you know just additional information about any any current projects or um plans to you know reduce water intrusion or or any um structural repairs that need to be done and then any cost considerations if to the extent of which that can be presented I understanding that that you know is obviously a very involved yeah okay we can bring you back whatever information we're able to obtain with regard to uh future budgeting for the for this building just to put just to put it out there another alternative would be because they're doing this work for us anyway is to have them work on the designation report and have a three-month update in March if we wanted to you know and have this have the de the date but not see I'm I'm concerned that we're kind of telling them to do the designation report and then we're saying but but we're not going to vote because we're not voting anyway on the designation yet we wouldn't do that until we have yeah but my concern is if you look at the the process in which the designation occurs essentially by signing off on step number three I believe is what we're at or perhaps at step two the you know you're kind of blessing the designation the way that I the way that I read the the the step-by-step process and I think for me the the first preliminary designation I've not been able to meet my satisfaction for moving forward with that next phase that's why I have a motion on the table for the continuance so that we can provide that information that Debbie just outlined and then we can make a decision to move on to the next step of the process assuming we have that okay so I will call the role discussion is concluded okay thank you uh Mr Brin yes M carmargo Mr erck yes Mr Meyer yes Mr Stewart no oh sorry Miss Weinstein Burman yes okay so that is continued to the March 11th meeting and I'll be reaching out to to the board members individually to just try and set up that that tour and I mean just so everybody knows I mean this building is still protected because it's in a historic Zone in in the district it's not like it's not like it's hanging out there being ready to be torn down and that's part of our our thought process is you know like is that enough protection or does it have to be historically designated and we'll we'll get to that at some point in time we certainly will okay so shall we move on um yes um thank you everyone um the next applications are are uh with regard to specific single family homes um I would request that I read each three of these applications into the record at once um present them all and then turn it over to the applicant for their presentation and then um move forward as they are a group and be voted on um together is that yeah that sounds good okay thank you so the first uh application is HPV 24 0613 this is 1810 and 1818 Michigan Avenue an application has been filed requesting an after the fact certificate of appropriateness for the total demolition of the previously existing single family residences the second application is specific to 1810 Michigan Avenue and this is HPB 24614 an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the construction of a new single family home on an existing vacant lot third application is specific to 1818 Michigan Avenue and this is HPB 24615 an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the construction of a new single family home on an existing vacant lot and variances from the setback lot coverage and open space requirements um staff has provided a a a history for the the request for demolition um the property was owned for a very long time by um a couple um and until recently um was for lack of a better term not maintained in accordance with the city's property maintenance standards uh for many years uh you know an unfortunate event happened where the couple who owned the property passed away um their estate was turned over to um a entity to manage the estate and ultimately with the goal of selling the assets um and finalizing that estate process in May 26th of 201 23 um there were violations issued for both 1810 and 1818 Michigan Avenue um resulting in unsafe structures so they were two unsafe structures these were building code violations um that was issued on May a year about a year later in May of 2024 as a result of an emergency demolition ordered by the city's building official permits for the total demolition of both homes um War issu ued and the the structures were subsequently demolished on November 26 2024 the board the planning board actually reviewed a lot split um and and what makes this complicated is over the years these properties while originally individual Lots were the subject of a lot of unpermitted construction that actually ended up having the effect of combining the properties um which is why this is coming to you as one application for the the demolition of two different homes so all of the unpermitted work really had the effect of aggregating all of these sites into one property for zoning purposes um so I'm going to go through each of the building separately and respond to the um that's so distracting um respond to the presumptions because again this is coming to you as an after theact demolition the buildings were demolished without previous approval from this board and we do have um and we have evaluated what the existing presumptions are so 1818 Michigan Avenue was constructed in 1925 I mean this was a jake really took a deep dive into the history of this property and it was really interesting um it was originally construct Ed in 1925 designed by internationally renowned firm Shulton Weaver amazing right they designed the bmore and coral cables the Waldorf Historia in in New York the Freedom Tower um it was originally constructed um not as a single family home but as a model for a large um Cooperative Apartment project that was um proposed within Miami Beach that larger development as to which 1818 was to serve as the model to entice buyers actually never occurred um so in 1928 the house um the building was listed for sale um and was used by different organizations as a temporary Clubhouse um in 1929 the home was was purchased by Henry Hubble he was kind of a fascinating person he's noted as a Mystic he was a portrait artist um and it just you know I'm not going to go into too much length but in our analysis it's a really fascinating um and important uh part of the city's history so we do think that this building is you know highly significant um both architecturally and historically in terms of um the events and we come to our first presumption which is um the historic preservation board shall determine on a case-by Case basis whether the replication of an original contributing building is warranted um the policy of the city shall be that a presumption that shall be a presumption that a contributing building that is demolished without obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation board be replicated um this presumption may be rebutted um for um in accordance with the criteria and I'm just going to go through those for this first one quickly um it can be rebutted if a full replication or contemporary depiction is not required to understand and interpret a property's historical value number two other properties with the same associative value have survived or three sufficient historical documentation does not exist to ensure an accurate reproduction in relation to criteria three above although plans are available for the original 1925 portion of the building no plans exist for the 1929 Renovations which introduced major site elements that became the familiar postcard um that we've all seen a million times of the Collins Canal consequently staff believes that number three three is only partially satisfied and would not recommend a complete replication of the previously existing building staff would note however that the proposed replacement design includes a partial reconstruction um in incorporate significant elements of the previously existing building so again this one is is somewhat of a hybrid in terms of our recommendation we are recommending that uh to the greatest extent possible the partial recommendation be require the partial reconstruction be required um now to the second presumption is that if the board determines that replication is not warranted due to the criteria um it is the presumption of the board that the new structure be limited to the height massing and square footage of the previously existing building this presumption may be rebutted um if the the proposed new structure is consistent with the character and context of the immediate area and the property owner made a reasonable effort to regularly inspect and maintain the structure free of deficiencies and in compliance with the minimum maintenance standard um as noted the replacement bill sorry this is a lot of information um staff would note that the companion application for the new construction of the home has been submitted staff believes that the new construction and we'll get into this in more detail is consistent with the character context of the immediate area um we do also believe that the current property owner has made every reasonable effort to inspect and maintain the structure uh free of deficiencies unfortunately in um when the current owner acquired the property in 2021 there were serious issues um specifically for this property in terms of its seaw wall and significant potential damage that it could be could do not only with the home collapsing but also uh significant environmental impacts that could have had should the building have been demolished um with regard to 1810 Michigan Avenue so we are supportive of the board um requiring partial reconstruction for 1818 8 1810 Michigan Avenue um again was constructed in 1925 um it was also related to the hubbles um Henry Hubble's son was the president of a Contracting firm Hubble and Hubble who actually constructed the building um this particular structure was much more modest and much less characteristic than the 1818 which we believe um is of of extraordinary significance to the city um it was a modest example of the Mediterranean Revival style of architecture which you can see um we were not able to date this Photograph but on page 10 um was a relatively early photograph of the building um regarding the two presumptions for this particular home um staff has not been able to locate any original plans for this building um additionally we haven't been able to locate any earlier photographs other than the one on page 10 which we do not believe it's it's original design we do believe there may have been some alterations um at the time of this Photograph um so consequently we do not recommend that the board require the the replication of this particular building um we do not believe it satisfies the criteria um with regard to um the presumption number two regarding the limitations on the building size and height um we also believe that uh the board should not require any um limitations other than what's currently allowed in the city code because the criteria that the new structure is consistent with the with the context and character of the immediate area we believe is satisfied and we do believe that the current property owner made every reasonable effort to inspect and maintain the property therefore we are recommending the approval of the um request for DE after the fact demolition with the conditions outlined in our report and one of those conditions is with regard to um 1818 Michigan Avenue that it be partially reconstructed in accordance with the with the companion application um I also just want to point out I have been um in discussions with um several members of the fling of the Palm viw historic district um in the Palm viw single family neighborhood association um they have had a rough time dealing with these properties over many years um the we want to make sure that the current owner is maintaining the properties um the vacant Lots even um in accord ordance with our our legal requirements in terms of fencing Landscaping um and so we are just um putting that out there we believe um we've been notified by the applicant representing the owners that they are doing everything um we also wanted to put an additional condition that both of these properties be posted with a um a no trespassing sign provided by the city of Mii Beach Police Department which would allow the police department to enter the property should there be any um any illicit activity or or concerns so let's go to 1818 first that's the the challenging one in terms of the new design um so we are just just to interrupt you so that we would be voting on that first part at some point yeah would you like it's up to the board what I would recommend is that we look at the new designs prior to voting on the demolition because the demolition does have the the condition with regard to 1818 and that's really tied into their proposal for the new construction perfect it's a lot of information and and I just thought we needed a a kind of a table a little table of contents and for certain if you would like to discuss the first application now we could any questions about the about the first application okay then let's continue and then we'll have the applicant okay so 1818 uh Michigan Avenue is requesting theut of appropriateness for their new design as well as um several variances um the applicant is currently proposing the construction of a new two-story single family home um although it is not a true reconstruction of the previously existing home the design uh does bear very strong resemblance to its predecessor especially when viewed from the Collins Canal which staff believes is perhaps the most significant portion of this property historically um it it is proposed to be modified even looking at the canal the seaw wall has will will be tremendously higher than it is now um as well as the home the home is proposed to be elevated to the required base flood elevation plus freeboard um but the architectural features along the canal will bear a strong resemblance to the original home um on page eight there you see the postcard um and then below that you can see the rendering of the proposed home so we would consider this a partial reconstruction and we do think um we've been working with with u miss m mccan for quite some time to really refine the details of the proposed home in order to make it as accurate as possible um and we are highly supportive of this application um which is a reminder of the significance of the site and we do recommend approval now due to the uniqueness not only of the the shape of this lot but also the fact that we are recommending partial replication or reconstruction of the building the applicant has requested let's see five variances um the first variance is to reduce by up to 30 feet the minimum required setback of 30 feet for a single family home um the second variance is to reduce by up to 10 ft the minimum required north side interior setback of 10 ft for a single family home in order to construct portions of the home um at a setback of 0t from the north property line the third variance is a variance to reduce by 12T 2 in the minimum required sum of the side yard setbacks of 22 2 in um in order to provide a sum of the side yards of 10 ft variance number four is to reduce by 24.2% the minimum required front yard open space of 50% in order to provide a front yard open space of 25.8% variance number five is to uh exceed by 5.8 % the maximum permitted lot coverage of 30% in order to provide a lot coverage of 35.8% uh requests for variances one two and three are the setback variances um the since the design of the new home we're recommending closely follows the sighting of the previously existing home and site improvements that was a non-conforming um situation in terms of the setbacks so we do believe that those variances um are a result from our uh recommendation with regard to reconstruction um and we are supportive of the setback variances um also the need to elevate the home to the currently required base flood elevation leaves little area within the front yard to transition to a new elevation so while the variances seem extreme it's not the entire home right that's on the front property line in in the case of the front yard it would be the stairs and other site improvements that are required to be elevated in order to transition to the higher level of the home um and also and I think I I mentioned this earlier it is a very irregularly shaped lot um the front property line has a length of 105 feet and 7 in and the rear property line has a length of 16 ft 2 in so this is extremely unusual and unique uh varant number four is related to the front yard open space requirement this this requirement mandates that a minimum of 50% of the required front yard consists of landscape pervious area the proposed front setback of the home and the introduction of the walkway stairs and driveway have resulted in an open space um proposed of 25.8% variance number five is related to the lot coverage um um staff would note that typically up to 500 square ft of a garage can be deducted from the lot coverage if certain criteria are met including the vehicular entrance of the garage is not part of the principal facade of the home and that the garage is constructed with an entrance perpendicular and not visible from the right of way because the design of the new home closely follows the setbacks of the previous home this results in a limited area area where a garage could be introduced as such this current proposal is required to count the full garage as part of their lot coverage um that if they were if they were able to reduce the garage area for the lot coverage they would be um very close to being at the at the maximum allowable so we do believe that for all these reasons um there are significant practical difficulties that um do do warrant the granting of the variances and so we are recommending approval of all of the variances uh can I ask you a quick question yes just a question about the we had a question about the variance number two um uh reducing the 10 foot minimum to zero oh it from the north property line yeah that's that's the canal but and the 30 is is the 30 is number one is that the um that's the East is that the garage yes okay that's so garage I understood number two but it was number one the stairs are what go all the way to the zero line okay perfect thank you but that's the exact position of the original House those variances are all in it's it's not exact it's close sorry Debbie what was variance number three please variance number three is the sum of the sidey Yards so because they're asking for the north side therefore their sum of the sidey yards is thrown off so you have a minimum um required some of the sidey Yards um of 22 Feet 2 in so that would be the north plus the South setback their South Side setback is 10 ft their North Side setback is what am I get zero any other question any questions for Debbie about this all right okay and for 1810 Michigan Avenue I'm going to turn it over to Jake who's going to give me a break is a break so for 1810 the applicant is proposing to construct a new two-story single family home on a vacant lot the proposed home has been designed in a contemporary Mediterranean style which incorporates many architectural concepts of of the previously existing home in this regard the front facade features a stepped asymmetrical design which has been clearly inspired by the previous home Additionally the new home has been set back nearly 60 ft from the front property line maintaining the historic relationship of the home to the street although further although the first floor of the home is proposed to be located over 5T above grade to comply with modern code requirements the introduction of the one-story garage within the front yard helps to maintain the scale of the historic single family neighborhood um we have included a photo photographs on page seven of the picture of the previously existing home and the new home and we are supportive of the project great I keep thinking this is the the timer which is why I was kind of like confused in the last when we were really the timer was every the timing has been a little crazy okay so um now applicant makes a presentation would you like to present sure um Miss Balter before you start uh have there been any exart Communications with the board members no okay and uh how much time do you need I think we'll wrap it up in 10 minutes but it is three applications so we do respectfully request additional if needed but we'll try and I I'll set it initially at 10 okay thank you we'll try to be concise I don't know where Debbie went but thank you so much Debbie and Jake for that very detailed presentation I understand that this is a lot in a short amount of time but all the three applications are very much related so we wanted to get it all out first and then address any remaining questions um my name is Emily Balter bardell Fernandez Lin at tapenz offices at 200 South biscane Boulevard with me today are my colleagues Mickey Moro and Michael Len we're also joined by the project architect Jennifer mccan gayoso and our structural engineer ysf hatum um I will go over the recent history of the project and then I will let uh Jennifer go over the more interesting history uh the property is located at the intersection of 18th Street in Michigan Avenue uh in the Palm View historic district the two lots that we're discussing today are the Northern two lots of this uh Tri larger triangular portion um as you can see this is an older aerial and you can um see the the overlap with the structures between the property lines it's two platted Lots uh originally uh we did an in-depth history of the site and as part of our analysis Jennifer helped us uh identify throughout the years where these additions have been added to the to the original structure um going back to Aerials from 1941 um you can see in blue and red where those additions were constructed some legally most illegally um and as far as the condition of the property uh leading to the emergency demolition uh both sites were analyzed these are photos of 1818 Michigan um it was determined that there was 80 to 100% uh deterioration and the home was in imminent danger of collapse you can see failing foundations uh damage within the walls extensive cracking um continued second floor all the way up the building um steps were were not safe um and and there was extensive uh steel stair steel stair connection failures uh and it was EV there's uh a large amount of evident of illegal construction and work done without permits that could not be replaced um one major uh issue with the 188 Michigan home was the structure built on top of the seaw wall uh it was deemed that the seaw wall was failing and it could not be repaired without removing the structure and the structure could not be repaired on that deteriorating seaw wall um so the catch 2022 with that issue um led to the uh determination that that particular structure was imminently collapsing um if you would walk on it it would bounce um uh to 1810 similarly we analyzed uh the original structure from the Aerials and where all the additions were added um you can see you know by current history it was crossing the property lines and taking up the entire site uh similar evidence of illegal work um you can see the front facades were entirely con enclosed um conduit crack exterior conduit cracking uh there was a a boat Notch within the property and that also led to some of the infiltration of water uh unto the under the foundation of the home the current condition uh so as I mentioned I would go over the uh recent history the in as Debbie noted in May um of last year the building official ordered the site to be demolished um it has the two home homes have been demolished and we're this week uh picket fence and Landscaping will go in um and then of course Debbie noted the condition with the no trespass signs um the current trustees have agreed to comply with all conditions for vacant sites which include that uh condition uh the seaw wall permit has been pulled um approved by durm approved by the state approved by the city so that is they're currently retaining a contractor to actually do the work um the illegal site the illegal improvements um created a a a one building site so then we had to go before the planning board to request a lot split uh the lot split is consistent with the original platted lot lines uh so now we could come before you all and we understand that there's a loss here but we're putting forth the the best assign for your review so I'll give it to Jennifer good morning everybody Jennifer mccan uh Studio MCG architecture in Miami um this has definitely been one of our more interesting projects um you have oh you okay do it uh yeah you know what I'll do that and from the I guess 25 plus years I've been coming to this building I've sat at that intersection in front of Publix and looked at the site and always thought that had to been a really cool building at one point uh but it's been in Decay for a very long time um and I was you know really happy when we got this and the first the clients came to us and said we want to build tow houses um and then we started looking more into the history and thought you know this is it's it's a better idea to just really keep the fabric of this of the um neighborhood the same um and again had we had to we subdivide we divided the Lots again back to what it was originally platted because of all the illegal additions that were done on the site um so I think U we've had a really good time doing this so you can see here there's um they used to own the entire block or they they still the the trust still does um the ones that we're looking at today is lot three and lot two 1818 and 1810 so what we we wanted to put back kind of the historic fabric of the neighborhood um also on 1818 you could see these images um we've all seen them before in the postcards so what Debbie was explaining earlier this was a model apartment unit for vbus Gan in the articles that um Jake supplied us with uh they were um it was somewhere south of the gor Island so possibly Allison Island somewhere around there there was going to be a apartment building built by Schultz and Weaver so this is V bisc these are some of the images of what it was supposed to be it's a curved Island thinking it may have been somewhere on Allison or somewhere on Mii Beach uh not sure um so I think this is and you can see on the top uh left that's pretty interesting you know this is 19 mid 20s these are the only drawings that we have of 1818 there's only two elevations um and a floor plan of of both levels and then you can see in the ad on the top it's Carl Fisher's property they were selling this for $20,000 back then these are some of the other buildings that Schultz and waver did so we have the builtmore we have the Rooney and we have the Freedom Tower two are still around today this is Henry Hubble um we found him in the University of Miami was a regent for the art school so pretty interesting um and it looked like when he bought when he bought the 1818 it was his Art Studio which we think was that Tower and where we have the garage um overlooking the Waterway we think that's that's where that was building card 1925 and then this is our proposal there was another building 1835 um kind of where the pool is but um you know we decided not to put that piece back and there's no information on that building at all so right now the site is at around 3 ngvd the minimum base flood elevation to build the house is at nine so at first you know how are we going to do this without it not looking like it's on sitting on a giant Hill so what what's great about this site is it had a concrete wall going all the way around it which is basically uh at the same height that the elev would need to be at so we use that wall as kind of a a retaining wall instead of a fence and now the building sits right on top of that so it's it's raised at the right height um meets minimum flood elevation um we're building it back as concrete it was originally wood um the house was 50 by 50 where that's the same height I mean the same width and um Dimensions that um that we're proposing we what we think was the Studio we are turning into a garage there's really no other place to park on the site we all we know we're going to have cars um but we did rebuild the tower and I think the most fun part was the facade along the Waterway um you know who gets to do that and even though that doesn't meet the allowable setbacks it's a really big part of Miami Beach everybody go drives on Dat Boulevard and if if they see that I mean that's just it's amazing and and and also what what it does is it also screens their backyard from date Boulevard and what's going on um with the across the street how much more time do you think you need I probably need 10 more minutes but I'll be I'll I'll talk faster this is the more interesting one anyway I'll go faster so proposed plan uh we fit it within the 50x50 it is a different plan than what was there originally for obvious reasons um and we concluded a pool a little pool house where the um 1835 used to be second floor right now we're showing it as a master whoever buys this we're probably going to end up changing the the layouts but but um we put the master bedroom on the second floor these are the um front elevation along Michigan we recreated it as best we could obviously there's not a lot of Dimensions but we did the best we we can this is the rear elevation there was no original rear elevation but we mirrored it so I'm assuming it was pretty much the same again side elevations open Veranda on the second floor a lot of wood details for the Verandas on the Waterway and on the second level and then we really do deep into the facades facing the Waterway there were original uh crests um we hear that there's a picture of that Crest that's in the Archway but we have not been able to find it we did the best we could at recreating that um and then as you know as there's uh similar details on the builtmore there's these wood walkways uh that um kind of create that buffer screen along the Waterway and then here's some of the images and the details that we took from the original drawings and the [Music] photographs can you can you point out that Crest just for the record sure it's um so right there on the bottom right that's it's highlighted in um on a beige above that doorway that's the crest and then these are some just material images that we were using and um the the landscape architect also was using native trees um silver Buttonwood green Buttonwood salt tollerant plants uh Simpson Stoppers Etc so we really want this to look like of old Florida and before presenting uh 1810 we quickly wanted to go over the variances for this site uh I think Debbie outlined them very clearly the variances are directly related to the extreme irregularity of the site it's a triangular shaped um much longer rear much longer front shorter rear and a significant amount of Frontage on the canal uh it also has to do the variances are also directly related uh to the elevation and the the change between the current elevation and the proposed elevation in order uh to bring it up to BF uh plus freeboard uh that's why we need uh the retaining wall and the steps in the front um as well as the garage there's nowhere else to park on this site um and the lock coverage is directly related to the sighting of the previous structure and how we're maintaining the massing so I think oh if we're ready we'll go to 1810 this is image along the Waterway and a rendering of the front Okay 1810 um definitely not as interesting of a building but uh what what is interesting is it's set back really far just clearing the original 1818 so sure Henry wanted didn't want to block his views so he set that building back and then what that area in the front became was a giant parking lot for the 20 plus people that were living in this before it was demolished so here's some original photos the the top is the earliest um the two top ones are the earliest images that we have uh and the entryway had a a bit of an archway so we really tried to recreate not I don't know if I'm using the right term but um kind of use that same massing and they points and the the open space in the front we tried to redo that but obviously in a in a new residential structure um so this is this is our proposal um again we have the archway at the entry um we have that kind of um a little floor room above it that they had on the original structure and then we divided the building in three along the front um but I don't think it's forced you know no not many are like that but actually this worked out really well um and then we put originally there was parking in the front we have the the garage not facing the street but um access from the side um site plan floor plan obviously when somebody buys this we're probably going to go through the plans again and and and change it a bit um but I think it's open and functional for a single family residents elevations and um and that's the same and in the Landscaping too he's also using you know um trees that are from South Florida that are salt tolerant and you know we really want to bring that back and then these are some of the um this is the areial view from the back in the r side so that will conclude our presentation we're respectfully requesting approval of the three certificate of appropriateness is after the fact demolition uh new design for 188 with variances and uh designed for 1810 uh we'll Reserve time for rebuttal and and we're available our whole team is here all right thank you very much uh any board questions for the applicants um anybody have any questions that they'd like to like to pose Ray um yeah just a um couple of questions that sort of tie in is there still a vacant lot is this part of the estate as well the triangular lot that's beyond that because you've got this boat slip thing that looks like it's there's three property lines that go through it like who owns that boat slip and who's going to do something with it so the the plans that we have approved by durm state and the city proposed filling in the boat slip it was illegally constructed so it'll be filled in the boat slip will no longer be there okay because it didn't show that um and the render didn't pick that up but the home that's still on 18th Street is there a future plan for that I mean it's in almost as deplorable condition as what you already tore down out of curiosity correct we're working very closely with Debbie um Jennifer our Structural Engineers uh to study that house uh it it wasn't as in imminent danger as these two um it has been secured security uh landscaped but it it wasn't as imminent as these two so these two were the priority for the estate um and for the neighborhood as well and then my only other thing is you know obviously we all looked at the Collins canal and that wall and and you know how it was like almost like being in in Venice um and you know you've done a fairly decent job with that but it still looks really plain to me is there a possibility that we could add some trim around the the window openings you know just to to add a because it just it's like this big huge blank wall and yes you you made a new uh modern you know uh entrance of where there used to be steps in and everything but the rest of it is just really plain and yes you've added some plants from your first whatever but it just seems to me like it needs to have something else there for the people that are going down dat Boulevard and say oh yeah that really looks nice and and your elevation on on Michigan is really great you've got you know the windows are all trimmed out and whatnot I just think you need do something more with that that's SM comments thank you okay thank you Ray any um Laura do you have anything uh thank you so much for beautiful thoughtful presentation um is there any of the original Fabric or character defining features that um could potentially be retained probably non-structurally um and I think it was a a great proposal on a on a very particular l so and to answer your question it's it's been demolished um there were things that we tried to keep but we couldn't even access some of them from the Waterway because it was on the seaw wall um so it's no longer exists at the moment hasco you like I think it's a beautiful design elegant design but to race point that triangular portion that you show in the surrendering is this a future site for another house that's going to be accessed off of 18th Street can you lift that up or sorry oh it's okay that is lot four which uh yes that's a lot four uh it's a part of the assemblage but it's not a part of this project because there's no there was never there hasn't been a house there for a very long time probably since the 90s so it's been vacant can you put the plan up just can you put the plan up on the screen just so we were all on the same the plan yeah one this is the the current condition uh this is the subject area of the lot split that we went before the planning board and we're returning these four lots to their plotted lines um but no there's no proposed uh new home or reconstruction for Lot 4 it's been vacant for a number of years um um so that I mean if you're looking to purchase but no that is not part of the scope and that was the Inland boat slip you had the Inland boat slip on that that's been filled in already or it's about to be yeah we we did talk about possibly looking at saving it but it's it's not an allowed boat slip no I know yeah my other question is um regarding the seaw wall the original design the exterior wall along Canal was integrated with the seaw wall M where it's currently it's set back have you studied in any way um setting the exterior wall along that plane of the uh of the seaw wall so I part that seaw wall will be outside of our property line um and I know that there's ways to possibly change that but I but the right now the seaw wall sits outside of the property so if we couldn't build the the building on the seaw wall um and I also I don't know if I want to do that again where you can't fix the seaw wall without fixing the building so you know so I I want to make sure that they're disconnected at least a bit so if we had to do repairs to the seaw wall then it wouldn't affect the structure above vice versa can you put that plan up too just to show us the relationship between the seaw wall and the and the building so you can see how uhop session has ended so you can see there on the survey where the seaw wall is outside can you use a planets like the cap it would be the cap yeah so um uh so you want to see the what elevations or plan I thought maybe the plan to see the setback of the yeah what he's pointing out so the seaw wall and the property line I can okay here here we go so the property lines in red which is what you see right where that cursor is right right there the SE wall is just a bit outside of the property and that's an existing um that's that's how it is today so we we put our building within our property that's usually a good idea yeah yeah is there a way to go from the inside of the property out to the seaw wall like to get to the gondola that's waiting for you down there yeah yeah that's what we there so there's that that um we have the doorway we had before so they'll be able to you I don't I don't know the rules with the docking of the boats and how that works but um uh they do have lifts right now on the other property next door so you know you know they could potentially have something like that Mike Mike Mike Ray Ray Mike is this part of your variance to put the seaw wall outside of the property line no or is that a separate issue all together that's a that's a Derm that's completely separate wa wait wait wait just are you finished ask just one more question go just one other question since this other lot that could be built on in the future why wouldn't the owner at this point in time take the seaw wall all the way down so that it's consistent and done all at the same time same permitting and all of that it seems like it would make much more sense he he is yeah that's what they're doing the seaw wall approval permit is for the entire length of their property which includes the vacant portion the rendering is not accurate then is that correct the the only part of the rendering that's not accurate is that they kept the boat dock and that was be the boat Notch when you say rendering do you mean the 3D rendering or the site plan which one do you mean um on 3A for example it's surrendering to to raise point it seems as though the seaw wall doesn't extend all the way to the property line yeah yeah I think our it wasn't a part of our plans so the architectural plans because that's a separate prop property but they they The Germ permits that they're pulling has that lot included in there it's it's included and the boat um cut out is not represent okay got it AC yes thank you that you're welcome if you didn't request all these variances side yards and rear setback forget the canal setback that's understood because you're trying to replicate the building but the other setbacks on the east west and south what would the size of your house be it it so right now the we'll start with the East the East setback is 11 feet um plus or minus the original setback was 9.55 uh so just a one foot difference uh if we were it's a two-story residence so we would have to be set back 30 ft so as you could see if we set back 30 ft the building would be in the canal so we would have to shorten the the rear by probably about 20 feet or so so instead of it being a 50 by 50 beautiful Square classical architecture we would end up with um a 30 foot by 50 foot building which is not what the original architect intended okay go ahead please all right um Brian are you you're you okay you got your did in and Elizabeth just to confirm hi Jennifer hi all the properties belong to the same owner correct the four Lots yes and then you mentioned during your presentation that some of the layout interior layout would change in the future so there is so those houses are being built for somebody else or they're going to be sold in the design phase and the future owner will have so we are proving basically is the envelope so the envelope will not change once it's approved otherwise you have to come back to us that correct okay thank you welcome and just on the on the V on the variances um that uh you're asking for the variances specifically because you're making you're trying to make the building as close as possible to the um 1818 to the existing to what was there and you know again it's a very it's a very sad thing that the that these buildings um especially Schult and Weaver home I I didn't even realize there were Schultz and Weaver homes on Miami Beach was um was uh you know demolished and you know we kind of I think we went through we used to have the you know find out when buildings were going to be demolished when they were on the and maybe we talked about that in the past yeah they came before before this board before it was demolished okay okay maybe it was maybe it was when I was in my Hiatus so um it was him so maybe that's why I don't recall yeah you you were the one that presented it yeah okay um so um this is a complex thank you very much uh I think now we um we uh usually do uh our U board disclosures but I think we are we had that we got that out of the way and no it's all good it's all good I just um and now is there we open it for a public hearing um yes I see on Zoom we have uh Daniel sdo had his hand raised but he lowered it so Daniel hi Daniel yes good morning um Daniel seral with Miami Design preservation League um we obviously record you were previous longterm neglect oh sorry I was already sworn in right no I just okay thank you we do take issue with the long-term neglect of this property and it's very unfortunate there wasn't unapproved demol demolition due to that neglect um however that being said we do support the staff's recommendation for approval of both certificate of appropriateness and variances with conditions we think the architect had a thoughtful approach in the new structure design the close references the original home while incorporating necessary resiliency measures we did have some concerns we continue to have some concerns about the Reconstruction of the seaw wall some of those were already voiced by the members of the board uh we're going to try to find our photos that we took of the seall before it got demolished uh it sounds like there weren't any laser scans done by the owners before that unfortunately so um we would like to have a condition that um the owner work with staff to uncover any available uh documentation because you know some of the seaw wall what's being proposed like one of the decorative elements it it kind of looks like it's like comes from Home Depot I hate to say um I don't know if it's just like an inventory item but I think this property especially that Seawall uh deserves the best attention and then in closing we do want to point out that there is actually one home home remaining on the site and we do hope that this owner if these variances are approved that the owner is going to very quickly bring that home back to compliance we'd hate to lose that home it has not been condemned and we hope the board will also encourage that thank you Daniel Daniel before you leave can I ask you a question yes um I I was just when you mentioned the SE well you're talking about 1818 and you're talking about the are you talking about the facade along the along along the canal or specifically the seaw wall itself oh I'm sorry yeah it's kind of like a vene wall so whether it's a seaw wall or a facade but it's that large wall along the canal that I guess now it's attached from the the seaw wall but yes the part above the seaw wall had some interesting like decorative medallions and I know we have some photos so we're going to look at those and pass those along okay thank you for that clarification thank any anybody else on of the public on Zoom else no and anybody here from the public wants to speak no all right with that we will close the um public um comment and um open it up to board comment so any thoughts r i I think it's a great presentation um are these spec homes that are being built that be for sale for other people or are do they already have owners no for sale they'll be for sale okay um you've done a really great job because that neighborhood is is so special within Miami Beach um and I know originally the owner wanted to build tow houses like what's on the other corner and you can't do that anymore because that was built before it became a Palm View historic neighborhood so I think you've take Tak particular precautions to make sure that you stayed within the uh what is wanted for that neighborhood thank you uh thank you as always for the presentation I think it's you know beautiful I I love you know all the references with like the gondolas on the canal it's very you know brings back kind of the romance of uh the 1920s Miami Beach so I think you did a fantastic job and very supportive of the project thank you I Echo what my colleagues have said it's a beautiful design I'm not one for supporting variances when it comes to setbacks typically but I think this is an unusual case that warrants allowance of it thanks thank you for the presentation um it was it's an incredibly thoughtful design uh I really um uh it was very interesting to learn about the history involved here um because there's so many stories that are tied to this property and I do endorse the project I think that it's very Tastefully done very thoughtfully done there are to my colleague to L's Point as well the the references are really they resonate with me and I I really like them um so I do not have any issues and the fact that the original building is you know closely positioned um gives me Comfort on the variant side of things Elizabeth thank you Jennifer that's uh it's really a beautiful design and I can see somewhat of the Reconstruction of a more romantic image of myami Beach from the past uh but I think I'd like to bring forth what uh Ray has suggested that maybe the facade facing the canal could have a little bit more decoration when you look at the front and the canal one has more attention to the T and the other looks more streamlined so I think it would be nicer if both have the same language uh but other than that you have my full support thank you and uh yeah I agree with my colleagues that I think this is a really amazing it's an amazing opportunity um it's sadly an opportunity it really would be much much more um opportune to be talking about uh the SCH Schultz and Weaver building that we're renovating and repurposing um and uh and its neighbor but uh given the circumstances I I would agree with uh Daniel's recommendation that you look more closely at the historic references to the to that fa that um Canal facade it's not exactly it's ever going never going to be the same as the historic facade but it can it can be a little closer so when when you and and you know I think you'll be working maybe Debbie would know whether you're working with um staff when a buyer comes in to make sure that what we approve here is you know is within um very close to what they what is ultimately built with with a obviously a specific buyer a homeowner um so with that I don't think there's anything any other comments so I'll entertain we'll do three motions uh so let's do the first Mo well actually we might need four Mo four motions so the first motion will be uh well Debbie do you want to take us through the motions just so you can keep them uh absolutely um so the first would be for HPV 24613 and this is for the after Thea demolition for both buildings second somebody has to I'll I'll move that okay we have it moved in second um let me call the role Mr Erick yes Mr Meyer yes Miss Weinstein Burman yes Miss carmargo yes Mr Breslin yes Mr Stewart yes okay second motion would be for 1810 Michigan Avenue this is hbb 24614 this is a certificate of appropriateness for the new home do we have a motion I'll make the motion I'll second okay um okay I'll call the role Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Meyer yes Mr Erick yes U Miss carmargo yes Mr Breslin yes Mr Stewart yes okay third motion would be for HPB 24615 this is 1818 Michigan Avenue um we'll need two motions but the first motion would be for the certificate of appropriateness for the new home and and can we add the yeah um SE wall I'll make that you'll do it okay I make the motion that we uh approve it with adding some uh extra Dimension to the seaw wall uh the seaw wall actually if the original one had actually a couple of steps built into it they went up to that area I don't know if durm will allow you to do that or not because you still have you know a seaw wall cap um you know it doesn't go any higher but but anyway the exterior of the of the bu building itself that you have the uh additional U let's just say trim around the window areas and make it look just a little more inviting to people walking by um and that's my motion can can I clarify because I think what may be causing the reaction and I I would agree with this is that the the Gable the projecting Gable over the door was a very decorative element currently to project the G the way it was historically which I would support would be projecting over the seaw wall which is City owned right city- owned property outside of their property so that would need additional approval no I I wasn't looking to do that I was only if it all when before when I would look at this property as it's falling apart you would walk out there and there'd be two steps down to the water on over the seaw wall that that was part of the seaw wall and I I don't know if you can add a step or two just to make it look more inviting to that area but that's just a thought but the only thing I'm putting in my motion is to uh add to the facade a little more uh illistration decoration to make it not so Stark it it is matching what was there historically on the photographs from the 20s I believe so we can add it but it would be something additional than what was there historically but see now it's so huge and Stark okay you mean when you got this High uh sea wall and then you've got the building above it and all you have is this little trim work around the the uh doorway and you've got a gate uh and yes you put some extra hanging plants but it just seems to needs something is is in my feeling and maybe if it's a stucco treatment because back then we didn't have flat you know St needs to have something you know to just make it more appealing to passer by so should it be a motion perhaps to work with the staff work with staff to develop a some sort of a motif on that we'll leave that work with staff okay okay so that's my motion yeah I'm just just to point out staff is going to be looking at the Historical image but I agree that the stucco I think could be a different type of texture that would be more commonly associated with the 1920s maybe even something like a lime paint would be beautiful M um and then they also have and I don't think it's really coming across in some of the drawings the the decorative iron grills and so we can continue to work with them on that but but it's not going to deviate Too Much from the original okay I just wanted to have something that just stands out a little bit and maybe maybe Grill work would would do that you know I mean just something okay thank you thank you for clarifying okay so we had a motion did we have a second second okay okay let me call the role Miss carmargo Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr me yes Mr Breslin yes uh Mr Erick yes Mr Stewart yes that four no the variances then the last the last motion would be for the variances for 1818 do is there a motion for the variances on okay do we have a second I'll second okay let me call the RO Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Erick yes Miss cararo yes Mr Brin yes uh Mr Meyer yes Mr Stewart yes thank you thank you good luck okay we're getting down to the end of the agenda our final application uh this morning still morning um is HPB 24636 318 Lincoln Road an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the exterior facade modifications the subject building was constructed in 1945 and is classified as non-contributing the applicant is proposing to renovate the Lincoln Road facade including the removal of the existing cladding along the western upper facade which is in poor condition and to be replaced with flued panels inset with vertical LED lighting and twinkling spotlights this modification and the proposed paint Scheme maintain the character and should Elevate The Pedestrian experience along this vehicular portion of Lincoln Road uh staff is supportive of the proposed application and recommends approval with the conditions outlined in the draft final order okay uh do the board members have any questions for us questions for staff no all right well welcome thank you before we begin could someone help me uh find my PowerPoint uh we need help with the PowerPoint yeah can you put it up please no I had had a power yeah was that oh I'm sorry so was in PDF it's just item to yeah there's also you two other presentations you want those as well this one's fine this one should be fine you can use this C there okay hello everyone and thank you for taking time to uh speak to us today my name is my name is Josh Robbins and I'm speaking on behalf of uh 318 Lincoln Road back in the 1950s this part of Lincoln Road was like the Time Square of Miami Beach full of light Vibrance and activity today however that energy is gone and has been really replaced with light and darkness well was once the heartbeat of Miami Beach has arguably become one of its least inviting areas and walk by at night and know know that people loitering in its dimly lit sidewalks thankfully efforts are underway to bring this area back to its former glory like pedestrianized it with the rest of Lincoln Road but those are but those efforts are still in their early stages and who knows if or when they'll come to fruition rather than us sitting back and hoping that the changes happen we want to bring about those changes ourselves when we purchased this property back in July we saw the potential itial that it had but we knew we had our work cut out for us the building facade untouched for decades speaks for itself it's warm paint tiles falling off and I don't know if you can see but there's trees growing out from its cracks we knew that we could just slap on a fresh paint of a Fresh coat of paint and call it a day but we figured this was the perfect opportunity opportunity to do something truly special as we researched this building history we stumbled upon this incredible this incredible postcard that I actually have right here you don't mind our building is in the background but what really caught our eye is this Darby's building in the front its Charming character really inspired us and we quickly realized that we could bring this facade that our building would be the perfect canvas to bring this facade back to life you can see from our picture that we're not only trying to do something historic but we're actually trying to bring something historic back to life and but it's not just about activating our facade for the Aesthetics it's really about restoring light deterring nefarious activity and creating a safe a safe place for people to hang out with all that being said I'd like to invite our architect Mark Herrington to discuss the design features of our project our proposed project hi uh thanks for considering proposal today um you guys probably familiar with it it's between uh Lincoln and Collins on the south side of the street on the 40 foot tall structure um was really the original Theater which were really not affecting at all the lower volume um uh we planning to to basically refinish the entire uh surface they really inspired by the historical research in the Darby uh facade what we're proposing is some these vertical strips as neon it'll be created with LED set into the stucco uh and a fluted uh stucco detail vertical flutes um the strip liting be far more durable than the original neon controllable and um and the signage which isn't part of our proposal um is just an example of what the the city's already uh approved for this special signage District which is really a a higher square footage to bring that energy back to the area um and those all will come as a later application and that's basically it thank you all for your time and we're looking forward to hearing your comments thank you very much um are there board member questions for the applicant I mean you are aware of the fact that this is part of the the fact they want to close Lincoln Road off Lincoln Road off and just like the other side and whatnot so your plan is sort of tying into that are you changing the U uh the vendors that you currently have in your building um we we bought the building with uh leasers uh encumbering it but we are bringing in new vendors we've already signed a couple leases and we do plan on when you started when I looked at the way you're doing the out you know with the seating and everything and really bringing the the building up to the next level I mean that particular block of Lincoln Road I think we could all say is less desirable than maybe we'd like it to be so thank you for your your thoughtfulness thank you Ryan how yeah I I would Echo the same point I I really appreciate the investment that you guys have made in this this district and especially in this particular block um I'm curious on this just on the signage what your thoughts were um there is that okay what are you planning on with this signage I mean I I I see the the fluting and the LED and whatnot but I'm just curious about the actual started fill in the blanks um but so we uh I think in your packet and just from a practical point of view are the the current leses like are there signage is also going to be there as well or is that uh yeah that's a good question so um I think in a packet that we gave you we have renderings without the signage but it just looked a little naked without the sign so that that's why we're displaying these um this part of the the building when we bought it had no tenants in it so those signs are all speculative they're actually the historic signs from that postcard that I that I passed around to you guys but yeah we're um we're planning on bringing in tenants and we actually I'm I'm not sure if you if you're all aware but this part of Lincoln Road has a very special signage law where you could actually cover 35% of the facade with signage after they they come I think get your approval or design approval so it's like right it's it's our Time Square district is the is the thought that you would use some of the same iconography and fonts that were used in the original or or would that be open to the leses I would assume that would be open to I I love it personally I like I like the way it looks with the old style font but now that would really be up to the leses Mr chair if I could just clarify yes so um so Mr Robins you're correct this is in within the Lincoln Road signage District which does encourage fanciful creative really interesting signs in character with that kind of mid-century period um these are just placeholders if a if their future tenants um and I know it's their intent to to encourage their future tenants to do something that's artistic and very creative for this for this building um if each of those tenants decide that and the owners agree that yes we're going to move forward with a really cool sign that would be required Brian to come back to you so the specifics of any type of you know highly decorative interesting sign would be required to return to this board for individual approvals or a separate approval um and I think it might be a little bit confusing because they're trying to portray that in their renderings with the historic signage but the the new signage would have to come back specifically um any other any other comments on this so Elizabeth sorry and then I'll get uh so just to clarify you're proposing we doing all the star fronts as well plus the area above the star front where the signage goes is that correct or the star fronts are remaining the ones that are currently there the the storefront again correct me if I'm wrong Mark but the store we're just doing the everything above the the storefronts the the neon lights all right thanks hco thank you Mr robs it's nice to see the Next Generation taking over you releasing the reins to allow him to uh present to us absolutely appreciate that um yeah well done thank you um in your letter of intent you state um in fact our proposed lighting and facade plan is nearly indistinguishable from what was present on the two to 300 block so are we to expect essentially the same light intensity the same characters and so forth as what we're seeing in your renderings yeah I I think so you know the nice thing about neon is you can control it it's dimmable um way more controllable than the and we worry about that a little bit you don't want to feel overpowering and that we're in control of that's a a good thing you know because you know when I look at the original it looks almost overpowering a little bit that's what I asked understood okay thank you um I'll just ask the in the in uh the staff report I think they talked about a an awning um plan or um let's see a plan for uh signage like a a guide I guess like to establish something are you yeah that's on A7 um you thinking of that dots in the square footage is allowed okay um and uh the awnings are unchanged at this point okay so there is no awning plan according to the we actually removed one of the onions correct yeah so um actually we we have a permit right now just a cleanup permit for the last space that we have to lease and the awning closest to the to the West um we're we're getting rid of it just because there's pigeons hang out there and it's kind of gross so we just want to clean it up but one of the awnings is uh I guess is uh is our tenants and that staying okay and uh so Debbie the the recommendation in the staff analysis I don't see it in the final order but I might not be is it's um condition one C so what we're asking for is um a for them to study a f like a master plan for future awnings and signage and also we have that condition about the paint color because right now what has happened over time is individual tenants have put their own things up and even their own paint colors on the building it's one building right so what we're asking for is kind of a consistency throughout the building as part of a a plan and we understand it's not all going to happen at once necessarily because tenants will come and go at different times but that there be a plan in place for signage the location of signage for awnings so that we we end up with a consistent you know awning program for the building and not allow each one to do their own thing so are you oh just just one second so you are you okay with that um with the with the staff recom with the staff order as as it's written which includes that yeah I'm I'm okay with that it it it make just makes our building look better yeah exact well exactly it's just you you hadn't quite presented that um but it it sounds like it's um definitely part of your plan so right I'm sorry I interrupted anything they do anyway requires a permit whether it's an awning or re even painting a color I mean so that's a good point there is control all right so with that is is there um any board disclosures no all right I thought there might have been but um open public hearing um I see we have one speaker uh Daniel Caldo uh yes thank you Daniel Sero with Miami Design preservation League we support the proposed facad modifications subject to staff conditions the introduction of polluted panels with LED lighting appropriately references a vibrant architectural character of 1950s Lincoln Road and we also appreciate the unified uh look and paint Scheme which will enhance The Pedestrian experience we know that this area has been in a decline some say managed decline over the last decade or so and we are hoping that the new owners will properly maintain their buildings and bring the street and the block back up to the expectations we expect of the r Deco district thank you all right thank you very much that uh concludes public comment unless there's anybody in the audience no so with that um we can either if you have any more comments you're welcome to make it board members or entertain a motion I'll make a motion to approve um the certificate of appropriateness for this project subject to the staff recommendations second I'll second awesome okay let me call the role miss cararo Mr Brin yes Mr Meyer yes Mr Erick yes M Weinstein Burman yes Mr Stewart yes okay congratulations thank you all thank you congratulations so that concludes our regular agenda uh this morning uh do the board members have any other additional information I um I had a chance just to check in with Debbie before this and I asked and maybe you guys would give me your opinion on this I asked if um uh we could recommend to staff to um see if we could get a re a presentation by the um team that determined that some of the some of the buildings a couple of them in our historic districts were um subsiding and just to get a better understanding of what the data is and what um what they think it is okay so I and and Debbie said she would entertain a motion to um or request by the board to kind of reach out to them and um see if they would do that for us I think this would be a great form and it will also be recorded so people the public can see it and potentially they'll make a presentation to us yes if that if they're willing to I will certainly extend the invitation and and give that request and that would be you know I will I will give them you know the next few meetings dates and and see if they're willing to to come um if not alternatively I could also offer they could present via Zoom oh yeah yeah for sure yes yes yeah I'll second that motion okay all those in favor okay great we didn't need a formal motion but that's stronger so I can report back to them that um okay yes I I was only going to say that I'm not going to be here for the January meeting you're going to be under the the Lindsay's wonderful leadership but I want to just wish you all well first of all thank you for a wonderful year uh full of gratitude for all of your comments and observations and uh that I hope you have a great uh great holiday and um come back refreshed thank you happy holidays everyone thank you e e e e e e for