[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] he [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Laughter] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] he he [Music] [Music] [Music] please take your seats the meeting is about to begin please stand by we are going on air in 5 4 3 2 one good morning everyone and welcome to the Tuesday June 11th meeting of the Miami Beach historic preservation board I would like to with this welcome turn turn it over to Debbie tet um thank you uh good morning everyone uh before we get started with the agenda this morning I'm going to turn it over to uh Nick ceris Nick ceris is a bit under the weather so he is joining us from Zoom today um and he will read the legal notices the in the uh the lobbyist registration uh notice thank you Debbie and good morning Mr chair and members of the board uh today's meeting of the HPB will be conducted in a hybrid format with board members physically present in the commission Chambers and applicants staff and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom to participate virtually in today's meeting the public may dial 1888 475 4499 and enter the webinar ID which is 817 48 3 47488 pound or they can log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which is 817 4834 7488 any individual wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon if they're using the Zoom app or dial star9 if they're participating by phone uh before I swear in the public and staff I'd like to read the city's notice regarding lobbyist registration if you're appearing on behalf of a business a corporation or another person you 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 don't have to register as a lobbyist if you're speaking only on behalf of yourself and not any other party or if you're testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific technical or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting or if you're 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're an architect attorney or employee representing an applicant or an objector you must register as a lobbyist these rules apply whether you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage defeat modification or continuance and lastly I'd like to swear in any members of the public and staff who will be testifying today please raise your right hands do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth thank you thank you Nick um first order of business this morning is the approval of the May 14th uh meeting minutes um are there any corrections or do we have a motion second all those in favor okay thank you um now moving on to the first application we do not have any requests for continuances this morning it is a short agenda we have two regular items and one discussion item um and we are going to be following the order of the agenda the first application is HPB 23 0580 this is 7410 column Avenue an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the substantial Demolition and partial restoration of the existing contributing building and the construction of a new mixed use addition the subject building currently is CVS is located at the intersection of Collins Avenue and 74th Street the building was originally constructed as a food fair grocery store and opened in 1951 two images from the m Herald were included in the staff report from around the time of the opening which show the original design the building remains substantially intact with the exception of the removal of the signage pylon in 2000 due to poor structural conditions the applicant is proposing to renovate the building including the restoration of the existing facades and the construction of a new addition which will require the demolition of the Interior Space of the building the new project includes retail at the ground floor parking at the second level and res residences at the upper three levels staff is supportive of the dynamic design of the new addition which responds well to the geometric features of the existing postwar modern building further the residential portion of the building has been set back from the street facades lessening its visual impact on the existing building and the surrounding historic districts staff has only one recommendation for the project which is for the applicant to explore the Reconstruction of the pylon which was one of which was one of the most character defining features of the original design and we recommend approval of the application thank you are there any questions for staff about this application okay thank you very much morning everybody oops ready for me Mr chairman gram Pat bur Howard Del Fernandez L and tap and his 200 South bcan Boulevard here representing the property owner to my left part of our team Mr JJ wood who's going to take you through the design we also have Sebastian valz and ulia fumina from Urban Ro about with with JJ to my right Mr Arthur Marcus our historic architect who prepared the historic resource report I'm going to take you through the property briefly um we do want to discuss obviously the uh the pylon issue because uh we think we've got a good architectural answer for that uh concern so if we could bring my prop our presentation up I'll do the brief intro and then turn it over to JJ so uh subject property northwest corner of Collins and 7 24th Street it's a 15,000 ft lot currently developed with the 20,000 ft commercial building as Jake explained to the west across Collins Court is the parking lot for this site um 74125 Harding uh I'm shamelessly stealing from uh Mr sing's uh work to to provide you the this image from the from the staff report which shows you the the building as it existed when it was first developed I want to highlight obviously the corner elements you can see the very large pylon but the the corner elements on uh along the alley and along 74th and Collins as well as that storefront system because when this thing was built I don't know if it was America's most beautiful department store but it but it had a a full storefront system on both 74th and on Collins status qu is very different right in in the intervening 70 years uh all that storefront has gone away right we still have the architectural details on the corners um but that storefront system has been closed in in the intervening period this this view along 74 Street uh brings that into Stark relief you can see again how what a dead zone it's created along 74th and it's really not much better on colins right the that we now have these small guns slit style windows that have replaced the original storefront system so as you see when we're talking about the renovation to the to the structure what what JJ and Sebastian and team have done is reintroduce that glass and that kind of storefront system uh that was in the original building just a bit of housekeeping um this is the first of two applications you'll be seeing on this combined property we have second application which all goes well will be here in July for 70 for the parking lot that will be a mixed use building with office townhouse town home and and Retail uh so so with the combined uh development this will be a full mixed use project it will have retail uh two kinds of residential plus office so really in our opinion a real game Cher for this portion of North Beach introducing again new new office space and new highquality residential to this area we think is a big Improvement this is the overall view of that combined project and with that I will turn it over to JJ to take you through the design uh good morning everyone my name is JJ wood I'm one of the principles at Urban robot Associates uh happy to be here this morning and to present this wonderful project address the uh the address of the office is 420 Lincoln Road uh so we're right down the street we'll have to swim there later after this uh presentation um but so we're very excited by this project I think there's a couple of very interesting things that we have the opportunity to sort of design as Graham mentioned uh the building is a post War eclectic structure so it has elements of art deco it has elements of um sort of the memory of Art Deco I would say and it has other elements that are sort of looking post Deco uh so the building has some there's not too many structures in the city that have the kind of post-war sort of uh storefront uh Frontage on Collins and on 74th in this area so we think that there's a couple of opportunities that we'll go through later uh in general the demolition is going to actually demolish quite a bit of the building we're we're looking to replace the Interiors because we have to do uh some structural work to to put the Tower or the small you know midrise structure but you will notice that the key piece that we're keeping is the reference to the pylon or what remains of the pylon that was remodel in the 80s on the North the northeast corner there that's numbers two and three and that will ultimately become the residential entrance to the project so from a demolition point of view we're keeping most of the walls in place we are going to take out the the walls that are uh don't have the storefront on on 74th and on Collins and replace those with storefront as Graham mentioned we think it's very important it's a great opportunity to actually bring back some of those original images that Jake found and helped us find um to bring back something that makes a lot of sense even before we found those uh before Jake had found those images we were proposing storefront on 74th because we were we thought it was a very strange condition that you would have nothing but solid wall there um so we're very happy to see that the original we're sort of in keeping with the original intent of the building so this elevation is looking at uh the the present day situation with what we're proposing from the design point of view and what's interesting here is that you'll notice on on the north side of the elevation on the upper elevation that's what the tower has that's what remains of the Tower so from an elevation from an architectural Street elevation point of view that Tower still has a presence on the Street this is what remains of it and so we have decided to turn that into the entry to the residential structure so we didn't Center the residential entrance on the building we actually brought it all the way to the North and then there's kind of a in the plan you'll see that there's sort of a dog leg to bring you over into the lobby of the building and to concentrate the retail on the Southeast Corner which is the intersection of 74th and Collins and then I want to go back uh briefly to the original image that Graham showed this image so the food fair signed this image is fantastic uh for a lot of reasons one of the reasons is that it shows the corner of the building this is the the the image that whoever was doing the marketing of of America's most beautiful low pric food department store chose to kind of highlight what they were trying to get at and if you notice the food fair sign is not necessarily oriented towards Collins the the actual text and is it's meant to be seen as you're driving by right the depth of the pylon is clearly oriented so that from this View you is how you see food fair not necessarily from Collins this is an this is a this is an old design move a classic design move a classic design solution I would say you see this on biscan you see this on a lot of myo where the whole idea is that as you're driving by it speaks to the time period post you know kind of postwar um focus on in the 50s on cars driving by on cins so the whole idea is that the signage is meant to be read from the south or from the south um and that's how that's the orientation that's the design so what that does is that it creates a depth to the signage that is um that sign I would have to guess is probably 15 20 feet deep into the structure um at the end of the day it's also an empty it's it's pretty much it's very permeable it's very visually uh see-through right so it's actually not necessarily a very heavy post-war sign either right the the whole point of the sign is to read the text and then there's this very interesting structural pieces these elements these sort of v-shaped columns that were holding up uh in the middle of the structure again um in our opinion that's sort of a nod to Art Deco or some of the previous motifs that we see but the building itself so reading the older building and reading what the older Architects were trying to do our take was that the the signage is meant to be permeable it's meant to be somewhat see-through but there are these angled v-shaped elements that um are part of the the character part of the charm and so those are the elements elements that we wanted to bring into um so the combination of vertical element sort of v-shaped element um this repetitive Motif is exactly what we interpreted to bring into the design of the new structure so you'll notice that the balconies are connected by these vertically striated v-shaped elements that are basically reminiscent of the Tower and so the idea is that and you'll see it in a in a rendering the idea is that rather than replicate the tower and replicate the pylon I'm just going to jump real quick forward to a rendering from the corner what we're trying to do here is actually work with the here work with almost the memory of that Tower right and that's the that's the idea that you see from the corner the residential structure is setback um as was mentioned it's clearly obvious that there is a vertical element it's not necessarily on the corner although you from this angle you can still kind of see the residential Tower but it's sort of the reminder that they're used to be a vertical element that was stried that had these sort of very interesting motifs it's just taken the form of a residential structure sitting on top of this historic fabric uh let me go back through some of the details of the plans just real quick but that's the gist of what we were trying to accomplish with the design uh of the pylon so here these are more contextual elevations we've got um on the top you'll see that's the elevation that I guess we'll be back in a month uh all going well for the other application but you can see the uh on the middle elevation here from 74 street again the tower is sort of um well I call the tower but it's really the the apartment building is sort of set back and is clearly reminiscent of that original structure the ground floor you can see the residential Lobby uh is pushed all the way or at least the entrance to the lobby is pushed all the way to the north that's where the uh historic Pilon was located the retail is potentially split in this regard but it's about 8,300 88 379 anything Square ft um there is connection Through the Alley we're using the alley uh as for service for loading that's where the ramp takes you up as well the alley to to go into the parking so I think from an Urban Design point of view it's also sort of the we're using the back of house properly one of the many amazing things that Miami Beach has to offer is the use of those alleys this is the second level parking there's basically one parking deck so you come up this would be for residential um use you can see the core is sort of situated so that you can circulate around it and then there's six units per floor in a in a fairly small footprint set back from all the different sides so that it clearly doesn't necessarily um compete with what came below and then the rooftech of the of the structure has a basically a pool and some other amenities so this is sort of a a slide that's talking about the other thing that we're doing is bringing down on the on the corner there were these very interesting vertical elements that are going to create these great Shadow lines and so we decided to actually continue those down onto the corner uh in case the retail wants to split between 74th and colins so you kind of create this condition where um it's clear that there are two separate entrances and that's also an opportunity for signage which you'll see in the rendering this is the alley so this elevation is a little more detailed you can see on Collins that the the entrance to the residential is clearly delineated it's a clearly a different architectural language uh I would say it's actually more postmodern it is more something like in the 80s which was done in the 80s which is another element of layer to this design of this structure the the building was renovated in the 80s that's when the uh um part of the the storefront other things were were changed and so what we're trying to do these are various sections so the building also has the existing structure has a very tall uh presence it's actually you could almost fit two levels in the height of the parapet so for us that's sort of a a it's great news because we can Shield the parking very very effectively with such a tall parapet uh you will not even know that there is parking uh up on that level because the height of that parapet is so tall uh which is great A lot of times we don't have that opportunity um in Miami Beach so the last thing I want to talk about is just the colors what we wanted to do here was also differentiate the two structures so we wanted to differentiate the the ground floor from the upper floors um and obviously the upper floors are meant to sort of recall this pylon or the Tower and the signage and the ground floor what we were trying to do is actually bring back um a little bit of that sort of 80s uh Vibe if you will which is sort of bring in the pink and The Pastels so um I think a lot of buildings on miy beach in recent you know in recent history have been sort of white and gray very beautiful it's an expression of the form it's taking Clues from Art Deco so that the light is doing the work of sort of uh decorating your building and so here we kind of had the opportunity to do something that stood out that was a little more obvious um we feel at this point I guess the 80s are somewhat historic for some for some of us I grew up in Miami and from the ' 80s uh Miami Beach was always a place of pastel buildings and so it's a little bit um nostalgic in that sense but I do think that the combination of uh lighter pinks darker pinks uh and whites are sort of uh it's a very beautiful expression I think we're trying to breathe some some new life into the structure and get some sort of pedestrian um you know a little bit of wow factor uh just with using the colors you can see that the vertical element on the corner that we brought down and we're going to have glass in between is meant to be a um part of that Motif so it kind of anchors that corner and again you can have the two separate entrances whether off of Colin or 74th right um that's sort of what the corner is showing and I think that concludes my presentation G okay uh we'll open ourselves up to questions in a second but the I just want to add a couple things um regarding Outreach we presented this project to the north beach CRA steering committee um I think it was even late last year it's that long ago uh and they were supportive of it they're very excited about it as well uh they think it's a benefit to North Beach to um and we also uh to make sure that we've reached out to our neighbors we had a zoom meeting that we invited every uh residential property owner in two blocks um too uh no one attended so it I wasn't a little sad that no one came to my zoom meeting but we reached out to everyone uh in the immunate vicinity so with that obviously we'd ask for your approval of the project as submitted um we're here for any questions and I like to reserve time for a bundle great thank you very much um you guys can uh can remain there does anybody have uh questions for the applicants go ahead Bri um if you could on the I'm just trying to understand a little bit I guess it's the residential building that sits above the parapet the pink parapet um what what is what are the zigzag what is this constructed of this like kind of the zigzag teres it's hard to kind of tell what the materiality is he's looking at the aerial uh rendering that you have just so they could put it up on the area this one yeah yes or any of those you can also highlight if you got highlight uh these guys the these elements that connect the balconies yes so there's actually a space between them they're meant to be most likely they'll be constructed out of aluminum uh painted aluminum and so there'll be something that is we probably would not do it at a concrete it's probably going to be an aluminum that just connects the concrete balconies and so it would be painted aluminum or painted metal right that's a good point from underneath you'd also see looking up I think there's a rendering that shows uh underneath you'd see through them as well you kind of can see here oh yeah you can they're not meant to be solid and then and so just going back to your your presentation you said symbolically you feel that the original signage Tower is is um echoing the structure is that what I'm looking so so I would say that the that the element of signage in the food fair was important for the food fair it was sort of building a signage right and I would say that here it's a similar approach it's building a signage and what we're doing is taking the elements some of the elements that translate from the original signage into the building itself without the words food fair without a historic sort of replication it is meant to be an interpretation can you show the best rendering that you have of that entrance of the new residential entrance I don't think we have a rendering we have the elevations here is probably the most so it's it's it's here right so it's here and elizabe okay how much of the existing structure you are changing to create that entrance because from the the elevation is difficult to see and there is a photo on page a09 of the existing so can you just walk us a little bit through the changes are from that photo to reach your elevation so we are here's the elevation so we are basically keeping everything of the residential of I'm sorry of the pylon what we're changing is the storefront so we're keeping we're keeping I mean based on uh uh uh everything that is architecturally significant and we're sort of renovating bringing back the the glazing storefront so this is the Tower or what remains of the py the base of the pylon that's what we're keeping so JJ this isn't a circumstance where the the existing structure is getting taller or we're adding to it no is the existing structure we are going to right I think we're going to add glazing we're going to replace the doors we're going to you know make sure that it's right right so when you're saying the you know the slanted part of the balconies it's going to be um aluminum clad painted or whatever you're looking at it's going to be similar then to like the exterior of the convention center the way those panels come down yeah okay and the other question that I have is that the residential is this meant to be a condominium or rentals I don't think that the I don't I don't know that we have that decision from ownership I think no right I don't know I don't know that's been decided yet yeah so you know even know if it's going to could possibly be a transient rentals I mean so you don't have any you're just throwing this at us without any it is not going to be I mean it's going to be residential so it's got to either be condominium or Department it can't be a a like a long it can't be a hotel like a hotel because yeah that's a different parking requirements and density and all of that so it is meant to be either condominium or apartment okay I have a question uh so is uh I like the project I like the design but my question is um is Phase One dependent on the approval of phase two no they are independent they they comply independently I think is that kind of what you're asking in other words if right you get approval for this building doesn't necessarily mean you're going to construct phase two or vice versa correct they're separate we were at some point trying to connect the parking above the alley and that went through a whole series of of complications so that's why originally they were there was a connection above the alley but that has gone away and so each project is effectively independent it has its own independent development thresholds that they're complying with but the same ownership groups yes yes and they were designed cohesively I think yeah and you'll see not to add to that but next month you will see that we have added there's a loading space on this property that will be that will be providing an easement to the other side of the street for loading but this this building does not rely on the across the alley for anything it's can stand on its own H you finished thank I'm good I'm good thanks thank you uh so much for the presentation this beautiful project um my question is um I do understand you know this perhaps is not feasible in today's environment but can you explain a bit more like how you approach signage in regards to the horizontality of of some of these more Monument signs here in the historic images so yeah okay let me go with this one so what we're proposing is that the so we don't have a slide that shows the two of them together but what we are proposing is that the signage would actually sit on the eyebrow if you go to if I go to the last rendering you'll see so the the monument sign is not sitting at the top of the parapet um we're leaving what we're doing here this image so we're leaving the top we're leaving oh yeah so we're leaving this element it's a right now it's shielded by the tree sadly in the rendering but it is going to be uh painted differently and I think just given the size of that uh signage I don't think we could get approved today or we'd have to come back for a separate variance or for separate approval from the board for a signage that big it's it's quite tall so what we did is we wanted to concentrate the signage towards the corner and have it sit on the on top of the eyebrow and then we would probably do the same same thing over here but we're leaving that ele we're leaving that space it's becoming more part of the architecture basically if the board wants to give us approval to put signage there we'll do it but have to adse we have to yeah okay there you go we have to Happ yeah can can I was going to ask um just ask staff because we've been talking about the the that there were a couple of things maybe you can kind of talk a little bit talk us through now that we've kind of seen the project a little bit more uh your idea for the tower entry but also um and also maybe the landscape uh was there a landscape plan that you had no that wait it wasn't we are incorporating Planters sorry go ahead yeah oh we are incorporating Planters behind the parapet um in the presentation we didn't include the landscape plants but there are Planters behind the parapet buffering the parking a little okay that that's was kind of what I was what I was kind of so um yeah we've been somewhat Relentless with the applicant regarding this the pylon the big pylon signage um it's you know when we see these it's so characteristic of that postwar period in terms of these signs that JJ is absolutely correct we really oriented to toward the automobile um you know that's the period of time in this country where automobiles became mass produced after the war um and so it's you know it's an interesting architectural element but it also has value in terms of our our societal and cultural shift that the country went through after World War II um and we just think it's really cool um but we have you know we've had they have explored it um during our discussions we aren't sure why it some of it can't come come back or the you know the majority of that vertical element I think you know one technique used in post-war architecture um that we see quite often is very uh a horizontal emphasis to architecture that's punctuated um by a very strong vertical element uh we saw that at the doville is a great example um of the effectiveness of that um that architectural strategy so you we we keep we keep being relentless about it um we understand there are practical issues um we understand this is a change of use from a uh primarily um commercial building to residential we are extremely supportive of this residential project in in North Beach and we understand um that sometimes these large signs do conflict with residential use um so you know we're understanding we just wanted to push um one more time all right any other any other questions from the board yes I have a question regarding those vertical elements that you're introduced on the corner because that's to me seems to be the biggest change you are doing from the historical elevation because bringing the star front is kind of bringing the back the pass back but that's a new element that you're adding can you explain a little bit how they are happening if they are increasing the interior space or they're just flush with the exterior wall or it's a good question they're they're basically flush with where they are now so I don't think that they're increasing the the footprint um because what was there before was effectively that same same Corner um but what they are doing is they kind of hinted at it they're actually trying to be that vertical element that punctuates the very horizontal sort of facade of so 74th is a very horizontal facade and on the corners it has this uh these very strong vertical elements so we looked at a number of ways and the floor plan the way that the floor plan works it kind of has this very strange shape so there's like a there's like a square piece and then there's and then it kind of kicks out to the storefront on Collins so we actually the resolu the the the way to resolve that was just to continue what came down from to on top and it feels like it's part of the original structure so in the case of the historic just using the sort of Secretary of the Interior uh guidelines one of the approaches to Historic preservation is to uh reconstruct something as if it was um part of the original or or you can't really distinguish between what was original and so that's what this is attempting to do is to make it look like it was sort of of its time time in place and so continuing that vertical element down and putting glass in between them was felt the most natural um from a design point of view rather than trying to do something that clearly differentiates which is the the residential sitting on top that's clearly different um from what what came you know before even though it's sort of reminiscent can you put the image up of what you were talking about and just like use your cursor to show us exactly what you're talking about oh sure yeah I didn't want to interrupt your speech sorry there we go that's up this corner this is what you were asking right miss kamaro the corner right that's the attempt at the verticality you asking yes so well so the existing is just on the top the existing let me let me go back to the original we really should have had the slideware the the Miami Herald image next to this one oh it's there yeah but yes so this is the original right and so the this corner is a little bit strange because it comes out and then it kicks out to Collins sort of a strange condition there and so we're basically just bringing down the vertical elements from on top so look like they come from the ground instead yes instead of exactly so you can see that the what's interesting about this design this photo is that that top piece is extremely heavy on that Cor Corner feels like it's kind of going to fall over but the department of interior standards um I believe would have kind of in kind of pushed or suggested doing something slightly different on the bottom to distinguish the new material from the older historic material we're introducing glass in between the vertical elements the on the ground floor yeah so you can see it you can see it here sort of I guess we can possibly zoom in oh sorry second floor oops here yeah yeah no I can see it in the plan um you can right 823 right so so there's glass in between the vertical elements and that the spacing there I think is about a foot I think we have a DI mentioned but it's probably about a foot okay so that I think is sort of also that's fairly contemporary that's not a any any other questions I have one more yes please can you explain your decision of having the 4x4 tiles below all those star fronts just Sim not material to put in an elevation I mean compared to everything else that you're proposing so the let me just go these below the glass here I think it's yeah I my page 827 has the material number six as a 4x4 white tile and it's going to be applied on the 18in high neall and that's under the star fronts if I understand it correctly yes so the this is the the KNE wall is a sort of classic Beach um storefront solution and so the image yeah the image is black and white but the tiles you can you can see that there was some kind of tiles on that storefront so we're going with a white tile and um and I'm being informed that the microfoam elevation I think had it as well so that is meant to be um I mean we can work with staff on the final color in the tile but the 4x4 we're taking it from here on the knee wall which I think is also fairly classic that's thanks as opposed to stucko I think okay it it looked to me a little bit like that could have been the microfish grid kind of floating over the entire image um which could be part of the historical record yes um right so just a little just to add to that that conversation um Mr shair if you don't mind um the rendering on page let's see this was eight of the staff report um and this is where it gets interesting notes that the the KNE wall portion the lower part of the building the solid portions were clad in Marble that's on the rendering um we found a permit from the80s that actually showed the removal of the marble but but only at the upper facade so and if you look at the photograph on page nine it it doesn't look like there's any marble at the lower portion although we don't know it does look like it's the relatively small square tiles um it's not uncommon we see a lot of these tiles on buildings um in a kind of a greenish color um throughout the city um I don't I don't have an issue with the white proposed but we could also look at I mean I love the pink paint Scheme we could also look at um another color absolutely and I'm happy to to work with JJ and his team on that it's just to refer to the photos you're talking that on the rendering to the left it shows like much bigger squares so like the new wall was one whole piece there is only vertical lines and then the photo that has the microfish Grid on it and he gets a little bit lost in that on number six sir yeah on the staff report page eight of the staff yeah I think the intent of the design may have been the larger pieces of marble at the ground level and then someone realized you know either with the cost or the practicality of having Mar so close to you know an area that's going to need a lot of Maintenance may not be a good idea so and this is just conjecture but I believe when it was constructed that lower portion at least were were tiles um at some point there was some marble on the upper portion of the facade so um as often the case sometimes when when Architects design buildings especially um you know pre 1980 in the field when they start constructing them some times they just make changes without updating the plans um and we see that often so I think that's probably what happened here all right great so if we have no further questions uh for the applicant then we will do board um disclosure any any disclosures no no I seeing none uh then open public yes sorry um I had a meeting with the applicant architect okay thank you lindsy um then we open it to the public hearing um anyone on Zoom please raise your hand if you would wish to comment on this application and anyone in Chambers please come forward hello members Daniel Caldo with the Miami Design preservation League um thank you all for your service so we are in support of the application we didn't notice that specific part though about the verticality so I'm glad that the members picked that up um and we do like the idea of reintroducing the pylon uh if it were possible obviously putting food fair wouldn't really make sense but if there is a way to use uh signage to reintroduce maybe illuminated signage it could be really interesting um so hopefully that's uh something that you all consider too thank you okay thank you Daniel um Mr chair I I see no other members of the public wishing to comment all right well uh now we have board member comment um about the project I think it's a great project and I'm thrilled you didn't have a variance thank you thank you ready has SCH would you like to say you okay um it's such a beautiful project um the you know really the lot is 100 by 150 so if we think about it it's it's really three residential lots and to have such a mixed use you know walkable I I love this area of North Beach personally so it's it's a fantastic project I love the delicate you know details with all the coloring I I didn't think it was you know overwhelming which sometimes it you know can be but um definitely feels like Miami beach however you know intangible that is I do love the signage and I'm hoping that I don't know if there's I actually don't know how the permitting works with the historic signage I would hope that it would be easier actually and get expedited um if they are following the historic images so maybe after everyone comments we can kind of speak more to that but I would love to see obviously the pylon everything is possible in construction today I know it's a matter of cost and also marketability really um of of the you know residential um or condo but personally I would love to see that that back as well as the the horizontal signage if there was a way to reintroduce at least the you know typography not necessarily the actual food fair although I think it's kind of cool too um but I love the mixed use um project I think it's perfect for the area and again on such a compact lot so congratulations on on um such a beautiful vision and and um congratulations uh I think thank you for the presentation the the project I agree it's very welld designed um it's really encouraging that you guys were able to straddle I guess the different architectural moments that um exist specifically in North Beach and that you were able to kind of layer on those perspectives I think that that that's something that I really enjoy seeing and sometimes the um designs that come before us don't necessarily do that well and I can tell that this is incredibly well thought out um I would Echo uh Laura's point on this signage I'm I'm just curious like what other kinds of applications you know could be you know or homages could be paid to that that signage the horizontal signage and and you know with assuming that it was consistent with the you know residential nature I understand it's a different use um and yeah I mean it look it was it's a really well-designed project I just would be interested in that horizontal signage and the pile the pylon as well it could be I'm just curious if there were other thoughts that you guys had before this that you know kind of things that didn't make it through the drawing board because of cost or you know other ideas that perhaps could be a little bit more visually um consistent sure can we just let's just go through the comment and then I'll give you a chance to sure can touch base Elizabeth would you like to say um yeah no um thank you so much for the project I think it looks beautiful and I mean it's well designed given the constraints of the site uh and I appreciate your explanation of where you got the inspiration for the diagonal um um metal elements you have there I thought it was a brilliant idea to create privacy to the balconies however I'm really torning between what I see and your explanation because explanation sounds very good as an explanation but as When I Look to the design I feel like somebody popped a second half of a building on top of the existing one and that really bothers me I think if the pylon were there and you could actually see the diagonal columns that you refer to in the pylon it would make more sense but because it's not there it's just like a connection to a past that does not exist anymore so there is like a broken link and that bothers me but that's only my comment thank you let's see so I really appreciate the project you guys are putting together I agree with some of my colleagues comments that this is something we you know we love to see this type of free development specifically in North Beach um you know obviously I know that it's been a uh strong suggestion to explore um the vertical element and I I'll share with you again you know my comment but I'll share with the board you know my suggestion was or my thought was that it would be a nice way to further draw the eye to the entrance to the Residential Building because it's right under that pylon so um if there's a way to feasibly do it maybe on a smaller scale not as deep I know that was part of the issue right was the depth and how that extends into the parking space that sort of thing um you know I would love to see it but you know as I think Laura said you know anything can be done it's a matter of cost and whether it integrates and if it you know is cost prohibitive or doesn't integrate then then I understand the decision but um those are my thoughts excellent thank you did you want to um respond I did so there's a couple of things to to note we definitely looked at many many many options for this for this uh signage um there's a couple things that they didn't have to design for in the 50s um that we design for now and those things are called hurricanes and so the signage to put a a tower of that scale and that size on the corner of a building is GNA require significant foundation and significant bracing and so it will be a our fear was actually that the signage ends up reading very heavy so if you look at this pylon signage it's incredibly permeable and so we haven't gone looking at the historic the historic image if you guys could put up the presentation again please so the historic image yeah so the historic image um that's one of the things we liked was the fact that you had this permeable sort of vertical piece right this clearly is where the balcony kind of divider sort of came from right and so we have not gone through the exercise of doing the structural load calculations we haven't gone down that rabbit hole but it it will be a rabbit hole um not to mention that it's going to we're probably going to lose two parking spaces which we'd have to find a way to get those two parking spaces somewhere else so we we we're willing to work with staff to figure it out we've been we've been working with staff for many many years um on other projects but on this one in particular we can we can continue to work with staff to figure out something um that is appropriate I I just don't want to promise to the board that it will end up I think Lindsay you're your comment is is well founded in the sense that it to reconstruct the pylon I think for one thing it's also going to impact the corner of the T of the residential and so um it no longer will breed like a like a tower it's going to be connected to the building right and that's a way that we can solve the structural issues but then you sort of lose the the whole thing which is a sort of freestanding vertical object so we will continue I think we would love to work with staff we we would love to find a solution that that works for everybody I think it is an opportunity it's sort of a rare opportunity um we were trying to get that memory actually miss kargo to your point that sometimes at least our take is that sometimes the memory of of a place is strong enough to sort of carry uh carry forward right um we're not so literal when it comes to reconstruction um but that's okay I think we can work with staff on that and and figure out a solution that works for everybody because it is something that's you know pretty unique um and I'll just add that uh it looks like um I I I am I'm fine with your solution to that to that corner I I think when it was built this was a single use building it was a so the sign was meant to tell you it was a place to buy food now it is a many a multiple building uh has multiple uses and a single sign would not serve I don't think it serves this building I also think it part of it's not it's not like it's an existing sign that we've all grown to love and that any of us have seen and that it's all so I would also say that you would you know keeping the structure at the end which I I noticed in one of the renderings is painted yellow is that the way it's going to be um in rendering A35 which is that corner rendering that you usually show it's kind of behind a palm tree tree but if you look closely at it it looks like it's I don't think it's no it's not meant to be yellow oh that's the next building oh so the smaller so the next building has the larger it's that little one with the with that pink um little square on it right yes yes my glasses playing tricks yes the yellow is our neighbor yes so um yeah I guess that uh so I'm I I think this is a a terrific project and you guys have done an amazing job with it um and I'd be happy for you to work with staff on on kind of how to articulate that entrance more uh maybe more powerfully with some kind of you haven't shown a sign for what what that condo or apartment building would be um and how somebody would know that it's there but um I think step if you're willing to work with us yeah um and I think Laura you had some questions about the the signage too so with regards to the tower I was just looking at this and and talking to Jake again JJ I don't know if you've looked at but one of one option that might be really interesting would be instead of reconstructing the entire pylon which actually may result in the need to demolish more at the ground level have you looked at potentially just bringing back those vertical fins and maybe those don't need to be concrete they could be in a different material maybe they could have transparency within them as well idea that's I mean that and then they could be lit right and that would be a very beautiful kind of Beacon which would be very consistent with the intent of the food fair signage I think that's more feasible I think if we were to make it light and steel and and something like that and lit we could absolutely and it would be cool and I think it would be appropriate because food fair needed the advertising right because of the function of the building and the period it was built in a residential building doesn't need to be advertised necessarily but this would just be a beautiful architectural element that would have a nice lighting to it and kind of serve as a beacon for the entrance and would probably not require the demolition like it would maybe if we did the whole concrete structure exactly so I would I would be supportive if the board agrees with a direction like that now with regard to the upper facade horizontal signage So currently um our regulations would permit up to 100 square ft along 74 Street and up to 75 Square ft along Collins Avenue the Loc location at that upper portion of the facade um is permissible so we could approve a sign uh at that location um if they were to exceed those Square footages however um they would need to return to the board they would either need to request a variance or if it is a historic sign that they're recreating but want to change the copy of that sign they would not wouldn't need a variance but they would still need HPB to change the copy so does that clarify um it looks like the signs are probably slightly larger than the 100 squ ft and the 75 S ft it's difficult to tell but it looks like originally they were larger than yeah it definitely does lindsy did you have a question I was going to say that I feel like Debbie's suggestion with regard to the vertical element certainly achieves the goal that I was suggesting which is drawing attention to the entrance of the residence but she called her to Beacon so she did a better job at it than I was going to okay awesome right and then just a question for Debbie or for all of us I guess is are we saying that that Beacon would be a reinterpretation of the the fan um pylon so it would be something more modern and or yeah cont temporary reinterpretation is that what the geometry would still have that that angled fin okay um which um but I think the materiality of it um we could work with the applicant on um and I and I would be open to even if it wanted to be more porous due to wind load requirements um that that would be quite beautiful actually with with shadow um and light um yeah I have no I really don't know what what you have in mind it would be great because you know I everybody has something different in mind but I I guess would you lose a park because it would be it would be going into the parking area you'd lose that parking space where those three is that what you're thinking that would be kind of just the three vertical fins from here so um it would go into the into the parking into the parking I think it's more likely that we lose two we will try to lose only one or zero but right I think it's just something that we have to work through and you're willing to you're willing to work on that absolutely okay yeah and I think it's important to keep in mind that based on the original photos that pylon was a standalone there was nothing around it and when you introduced that new element next to a building that say the same height or higher than it it will lose its impact and appeal so I'm not sure exactly how the two will work together so it's really needs some exploration right yeah I kind of feel like you already like your argument you already have a tower there um is is probably more um yeah that it was a different context a different time a different use all those things were uh different in the 50s than in you know today's time but um but the notion of it being of marking that entrance um also the also the other thing that changes too Debbie to consider I think is that the what's existing now in the um at that entrance was not there when the pylons were there it was a completely different design are you also recommending that they go back and reconstruct that original design for the for that entrance it wasn't part of our recommendation [Music] um again that would probably lead to a more demolition um but we could certainly explore that with the applicant the board could certainly require that um I'll leave that up to you yeah I I mean it just seems like what you have there is an 80s construction that you're preserving right um which would not NE which would not naturally have a 50s um pylon on top of it right I don't know it it seems like it it seems like we're working a little hard to make uh for something that maybe will not be the not represent present the history of this building um maybe as well as I could I think that the probably the number one thing that's going to look awkward or or is not going to feel right as if we were to reconstruct the the height of the of the pylon it's going to look completely out of place with having an object next to this other residential feature so I think the the first thing that we would look at is what's sort of the appropriate massing and what's sort of the appropriate height and I think that's going to start to limit the structure which means that we won't have to go back and reconstruct the facade so I think think that there's some um there's some there's some flexibility that we can do in the design to come up with something and we've already looked at this many different ways and the ones that look the the ones that don't work are the are the tallest the ones that sort of reconstruct the massing of that pile and it just looks silly so maybe you work with staff on kind of reinterpreting the tower in some way so that it's maybe that entrance is marked more but it also kind of if the if the if the design if the design problem was to create signage previously we should attempt I think in today's in 2024 we should attempt the same we should attempt to solve the same problem which is signage and marking it doesn't necess back then it was a pylon for cars you know mass production of cars that's what worked for a single use building that had food fair right today's world it's a different world but the condition hasn't necessarily changed of marking the entrance yeah but it requires a contemporary Solution that's sort of the argument Ray Ray you had a question right now the only signage that you know is 7410 cins Avenue I mean we don't know what's going to go in there we they don't if a name for the building or anything so you know like that's all you can be talking about so we talk about signage until they know what businesses are going in there how and whatever and that can come back to us if they're asking for variances or staff takes care of it from there but I you know I I personally think when you're talking about making some changes now that we'd have to continue it to come back and look at what those changes are I'm perfectly happy with what they're they've presented to us now anything additional I think would have to be continued and come back to us Elizabeth just two questions so one of them is regarding the need for signage because if we put the signage in where it is now we'll be highlighting the residential entrance which doesn't necessarily mean that much advertisement so then there is a conflict in there and are you at your maximum allowable height yes cuz one thing that just occurred to me is if you explore putting the sign above the building and ask for a variance a height variance and just have the sign up there because in a way you'd be replicating the idea of a vertical element with the sign on top it's just instead of being pylon would be the residential Tower just a suggestion Lindy oh okay any any other um okay any other comments uh so I guess do I have um do I have a motion um will somebody like to recommend a motion I mean I would be open to I I would move to approve it with staff recommendations which I think includes the further Exploration with staff assistance on that vertical element but doesn't necessarily require them to come back to us is that right um yeah I would just recommend that the condition be modified that it would also include a reinterpretation not a strict restoration yes so I I would move that we approve the project um approve the application with as per staff recommendation with the modification that the further exploration of the vertical element uh be a a reinterpretation and not necessarily a strict reconstruction do second I'll second thought okay let me call the role um Miss Karo Mr erck yes Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Meyer yes Mr Breslin yes Miss Lovel yes Mr Stewart yes thank you so much thank you we'll see you next month and get well Mr ceris okay the next uh application on the agenda this morning is HPB 24 611 this is 15 or excuse me 1455 Ocean Drive an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the introduction of a canopy structure along 15th Street and a variance from the required setbacks um the subject building is a a 15-story mixed use residential and commercial building uh it was constructed in 1998 um at the southeast corner of the intersection of Ocean Drive in 15th Street um the applicant is requesting a canopy structure that would provide weather protection um at their existing uh vehicular entrance it would be um providing weather protection adjacent to the guardhouse um for guests of the building um when they need to uh enter through that um system the existing guardhouse in barrier Gates um are located um within the driveway and it it is a staffed um guard house um for security uh the new canopy is proposed to be introduced uh to provide the rain protection for the guests uh while they communicate with the guard housee the canopy is composed of aluminum columns and beams and it does have a glass roof uh staff has no objection to the design of the Guard housee which is consistent with the architectural character of the existing uh property um so we do not believe it will have any adverse impact it's a very light structure um on the existing building site or the historic district um the variance is somewhat complicated um but they are requesting to reduce by 42 feet uh 42.4 9 ft the minimum required side facing a street setback of 40 9.35 ft in order to construct the canopy with a setback of 6.86 Ft from the north property line um it's important to note that the existing building including the guardhouse have currently non-conforming setbacks so if they came in to build the guardhouse in the exact location that it's at today they would also need the variance um it's also a very unusual large lot width and the um side facing the street setback is calculated based on the width it would be 15% of the lot width in this instance the lot width is nearly 300 ft um so the required North Side setback which is close to 50 ft um would not serve their function whatsoever right because it would be significantly past where Vehicles need to stop to check in with the with the uh staff of the Guard housee um staff would also note that the lot is very irregularly shaped um it has a significant jog along the north property line we do believe these these present practical difficulties um due to the unique conditions of the property including both the existing um non-conforming structures as well as the irregularly shaped uh lot we are recommending approval um subject to the conditions in our staff report I'm happy to answer any questions um if you do not have questions we can turn it over to the applicant any questions no all right please uh would you like to present good morning members of the board my name is Matt distelhurst steady Builders Group 350 nor East 24th Street Miami um we do not have a formal presentation today um essentially like uh like was said the cany provides both an aesthetic and also a uh performance component to it uh the aesthetic component that you see here in glum and aluminum is consistent with two other canopies that currently sit uh along the Collins Avenue area um these were approved permitted and are currently installed uh on a different portion of the property along the west elevation um I mean this um this particular project this particular component has been well thought out for the past several years um the design team and also the residents of the property are very excited to see this structure go in and um we have worked with and we've met with staff previously to review these elements um and we look forward to moving forward with it thank you very much are there any um questions for the applicant from any board members NOP seeing none um then uh any disclosures seeing no disclosures uh then we can open the uh open to public um uh public hearing anyone on Zoom please raise your hand anyone in the audience please come forward um Mr chair I see no members of the public okay and uh so I guess we move right to board comment does anybody have um anything they'd like to say about this or the only thing I would say is I I definitely agree the variances are required in this P particular case I mean it there's it it's totally within their property it's not it's not at all affecting anybody walking by or around and to me that no problem anybody else any comments seeing no comments uh do we have and and we did disclosures we did board comment and do we have a a motion uh we need two motions we need one for certificate of appropriateness and then one for the variance we can do either one first let's let's do the variance first you were just mentioning that okay do we have a second second okay let me call the role Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Meyer yes Mr Erick yes Miss Lovel yes Miss carmargo yes Mr brein yes and Mr Stewart yes okay we'll need a second motion for the certificate of appropriateness I'll move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness we have a second a second okay I will call the role Mr Meyer yes Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Erick yes Mr Breslin yes Miss Lovel yes Miss carago yes and Mr Stewart yes congratulations thank you all for your time okay so the last item on the agenda this morning uh is a discussion item so this is discussion only there is not a project before you um but it is a proposal to convert The Clevelander located on 10th Street in Ocean Drive to a residential project with no outdoor entertainment um this discussion was referred by the land use and sustainability committee um at their previous meeting uh the actually it was I guess in their May meeting um they did see a presentation um by the owner of the property and his Representatives uh which included the conversion of this entertainment nightlife venue to a residential project um and part of that discussion was regarding potential uh amendments to the Land Development regulations uh which would include potentially additional height and additional f um and the land use committee did discuss the item um they focused specifically on on height and massing um they did request that the applicant meet with staff um after that meeting and you know further explore potential options uh that meeting did take place um we were happy to to work with the applicant we we looked very closely at the mass SC and what potentially could work there um I think one good reference um of of proper appropriate massing along Ocean Drive with a new addition is the Victor Hotel so if you look at the later addition to the Victor Hotel it's it's um it's kind of a U-shaped building now um that creates a break in the middle so we did uh advise the applicant to to explore that type of Direction um they have done so I I just saw the plans a few days ago um but the plans also include that additional height um and again the land use committee is has retained this item on their agenda um and so they will be discussing it further and specifically any new uh code amendments that may be required and wanted to get this board's feedback since this is you know in a very prominent location within the Ocean Drive col Avenue historic district and with that I believe the applicant has a presentation that he is going to give um and I believe the owner of the property is here as well good morning everyone for the record I'm Alex tatsi with the law firm of Shelton Bowen uh and I'm here today on behalf of our client the jesta group which is the owner of the Clevelander and Essex House hotels joining me today is Anthony O'Brien senior managing director of jesta who has flown down here from Montreal to be here in person at today's hearing also joining me is uh our terrific architect Kobe karp who's sitting right behind me so the item before you is a referral from the Miami Beach city commission's land use committee and specifically the land use committee is seeking the input of the HPB regarding the proposed height and massing of a mixed use residential project to be located at The Clevelander and Essex properties the historic structures on both of the properties would be preserved and then residential Towers would be constructed now in order to give you a proper context let me give you the history about how we got where we are it's a little bit complicated but just bear with me if you would for a moment so in January of this year I approached the City attorney Rafael p and proposed a settlement of a variety of issues that were pending between the Clevelander and the City of Miami Beach the settlement would take the form of a development agreement under the statutes and the settlement agreement would cover a number of issues but there were really four main issues one in 2021 under mayor galber the city had passed ordinances which would have blocked The Clevelander from performing outdoor entertainment and rolling back hours at alcohol The Clevelander filed a lawsuit and obtained temporary injunctions blocking both of those ordinances although the lawsuit has been inactive for a period of time it does remain pending so as part of the settlement that lawsuit would be dismissed and would go away between both parties secondly as I indicated the laws that was the subject of the litigation would have blocked The Clevelander cup and outdoor entertainment it's no secret that many policy holders in the city have wanted the Clevelander to close their outdoor venue and have wanted a decrease in outdoor nightlife on Ocean Drive so as part of this settlement The Clevelander would abandon its cup permanently and would close its outdoor bar venue third in October of last year our client filed with the city a site plan application under the live local act the city has refused to process that application despite our request that to do so the city also passed various ordinances that they claim block Li local projects indicating the city's desire to limit live local programs in the city as part of this settlement we would withdraw our live local application that was filed in October in exchange for the above items the city would approve a site plan application on our properties and would give us additional height in F in order for this all to make sense for the closure of the outdoor bar in January 31st of this year the Miami city Comm Miami city Commission in a unanimous 70 vote referred to the land use committee for further discussion and Analysis this settlement and development agreement the item has now been discussed twice at land use and at the last land use commit meeting the committee indicated they wanted the hpb's input on the proposed project that would be Central to this overall settlement Mr chair before I turn this over to Anthony O'Brien I did want to make um an ex party disclosure under the city code so in connection with today's discussion item the property owner is disclosing that it had X party Communications before this meeting the property owner emailed all the members of the HPB received responses back from most of them and had individual virtual meetings with the chair with Mr Erick and with Mr Meyer the subject matter the communications and meetings was to discuss the Redevelopment project and to answer questions regarding the project the disclosure is being made in compliance with section 2 d512 of the city code so Mr chair now if it's okay with you I'll turn it over to Anthony O'Brien from jesta who has a PowerPoint presentation just before you start I um um just in terms of how this how this works do we have open public hearing after this is there any does that happen or so um this is not a quasa Judicial hearing exactly um so the board can you know uh take public comment you do you're not required to take public comment but um certainly um we could follow the same format as we do for for reg just so that people's expectations so we can ask questions after the after this and then and then invite any public person who wants to speak all right great thank you great thank you Mr chair and board thanks for hearing us today I really appreciate um having this audience um as Alex mentioned this is this is a complicated project and it goes um Beyond historic preservation and there's conations that are legal and financial um and you know the the the risk of our business in its current state is a significant one for us um I know that most of you are here to talk about historic preservation um and that is certainly a very very important piece of this for us um and uh I say that because when we first bought the Clevelander um I believe about seven years ago the intent was never Redevelopment it was never you know how do we figure out how to build a residential Tower here Etc we love the business model um but more importantly we love the iconic architecture and the neighborhood that it sits in um and our company um we're not a typical I guess nightclub owner or something like that uh that Clevelander you would expect with other people on Ocean Drive um or a large uh International uh development entity and we tend to specialize in projects that are you know typically in sensitive Heritage areas so we have a fair bit of experience in that area I'm not saying we're experts I'm not saying I'm a local to Miami and I know exactly to do we're trying to approach this in the most collaborative way to come up with a project that makes sense for us but also more importantly for the community and you know 100 years from now we're all looking at this saying hey that was a good decision this is a direction that we're glad we took um so if I can go to the presentation um our company we're we're located in Montreal um thanks for having me fly down into a rainy week I I do appreciate that um and we have properties in New York in Houston and in Miami here in North America and then in Europe we have properties uh in the UK um in Turkey in France and in Germany and Italy um and I think you know I go to this picture because this is I've literally spent the last 12 years of my life on this project this is an Old Montreal um and I want to show it to you because I think it's an important representation of what we do as a company and and 12 years is a very long time to develop a project most people don't have the stamina to do that and the reason it took so so long as that we're in the most historically sensitive area probably of all of Canada um that's an existing Canadian Pacific uh Hotel train station and there's three historic train stations intact on this site um which is the only place in North America that still has that uh context um what took a long time on the site and there was a parking lot behind where you see the new residential uh the new towers was a parking lot um in Canada we have what's called minister of culture and the minister of culture is responsible for any herit AG decisions for development and so even though we had zoning to do I think a, 500,000 Square ft um the minister of culture could say no you have to limit to one story or two stories or three stories and so we we embarked on a very long process um with citizens with the ministry with with not for-profit organizations Etc to design a project that made sense for everyone uh in the process we left probably uh 30% of the density of the project on the table what you don't see here is in between all those buildings is a 1acre pedestrian only Park um that we have publicly public access to so it's privately owned by our company but it has Public Access and probably the biggest feed of this was all those new buildings you see all the material on those facades um are found on the historic buildings in Old Montreal so all the materials are found on 150 200 250 year old buildings uh the bar building on the upper level is made out of zinc which is what they made Church rooftops out of in the 1800s um we said yes G to that and then found out there were only like two 75-year-old Italian men that knew how to actually put zinc on a building so that took quite a quite a while to do um the white polished concrete on the other Tower um reflects the the clock tower that you see in the distance which is an historic um clock tower on the waterfront and then the brick uh on the hotel which is a Hyatt Hotel um was a brick uh you would only get the clay from France at alir uh so we had to import the brick from France which is where they got all brick back in the day and I know that has nothing to do with what we're talking about today but I wanted to give the context of how we like to approach projects so coming to um you know where we are uh and I don't mean this image isn't meant for shock and awe but there's basically two routs that we've been exploring one is live local um as Alex had mentioned we submitted uh back in October a project under Liv local um and under Liv local just so everyone's aware the the the law in effect right now allows a maximum height um equivalent to whatever the tall height allowances within one mile of the building the maximum f is 1.5 times which would be 5.25 for our site obviously the whole point of live local is having affordable housing and pushing that through quickly um which is why they circumvented HPB City commission other public hearings um and underliv local there's no requirements for the outdoor bar Etc we had uh obviously we've been working with Kobe for a long time Kobe did this massing we then looked at it within the context of the neighborhood realized it was too tall um and so we we took that 30 Story Tower down to an 18-story Tower and this is what we submitted back in October uh under Liv local so we submitted the project and um and then really embarked on the approach that we're on today so six months later we've been on this approach trying to find a way to work with local community groups with the commission with planning staff hopefully with yourselves as well well to come up with a project that makes sense for um the neighborhood uh the context of the neighborhood and really that celebrates the history um of what we find along Ocean Drive this obviously very sensitive area and so um you know really the the the the proposal in place or what we're trying to do is come up with a collaborative approach where we say okay what actually makes sense in terms of massing and height um how do we come up with a project that obviously you know for us we need something that makes Financial sense to change from the current business to a new one um we want to work in Partnership to come up with the right program and then obviously the skin on the building the facade and all those things how do we treat that do we look at something that's you know Art Deco or do we look at something that is probably more modern so it's not competing with the existing Art Deco components we need guidance help and collaboration with yourselves and other people in the community to do that um in this process we would potentially close the outdoor bar as Alex had mentioned we would potentially abandon the cup for outdoor entertainment and in our opinion because you know again we may not be the world Experts of this but we understand urban planning we we truly feel that this part of the neighborhood of Miami Beach needs to be rebalanced there's too much nightlife tourism we've all seen the headlines we've experienced it firsthand um it's not a great place to do business anymore to be perfectly honest and we feel that a project like this is going to be a catalyst to help change the neighborhood Maybe bring back some of what made this place so celebrated you know 20 or 30 years ago so from that point we um we conducted a number of massing studies I think I think Kobe's team you know has done 15 or 20 different massing studies and we went out and met with different groups um Community groups um you know Daniel at at mdpl and talked about the different massings and a lot of people um really attached the idea of instead of one Tower that's too tall what if we split the massing into two had less height um and potentially kind of split it up across the property so we took that direction this was the first massing that was presented um at L USC in March uh and these were two buildings of 150 ft I think what's important here every single massing that's been done is doing the exact same thing which is preserving and protecting the Historic ess6 Hotel in its entirety and preserving the historic Clevelander in its entirety so the two in this instance where we have the Two Towers they're both sitting on um on let's say uh structures or land that do not have the sensitivity of those two uh those two components um at L USC uh it was recommended to go back and speak to planning staff we did so there was discussion of actually going back to one Tower um which was the next uh study that we did um but under this study under one Tower and trying to bring the height down the building got fatter and this did not this did not meet a lot of excitement from a lot of people I think it was a little too uh imposing on top of the his historic Clevelander um as well as a pool patio uh so from this meeting again we were referred back to planning staff um and at that point actually got some very good direction in terms of how to site the massing and potentially approach the project and that's really all we've been looking for is clear Direction on what would be acceptable from a massing and height perspective um which we haven't necessarily gotten to this stage six months into the process so with that I wanted to give you the history I now want to hand it over to Kobe who's going to show you the final massing that we've been working on um in the past couple of weeks that take into account the last uh planning staff uh commentary thanks thank you good morning thank you so much for um your time I think so based on our meeting that we had with d Ian company um we looked at not only reducing the height but also breaking up the massing the greatest opportunity that we really have here is from a historic preservation standpoint is that we have an opportunity to take the SX and the Cleveland the indoor and the outdoor spaces not only to restore them but now bring them in perpetuity or in continuation to the public meaning if this is a luxury Residential Building um then there is an opportunity to use to access the public spaces of uh the outdoor area of the Clevelander as well as the aex the outdoor areas of the two buildings together are very important and there is an opportunity and as was asked by us to raise the building floated up so more of the the open space that we have been able to use at The Clevelander and at the asex both public spaces indoor and outdoor um to be open to the public accessible to the public in um continuity the building what we did is we took it uh we broke it into massing and this is the massing where we are today um just to show the progress um obviously we're looking to relate the horizontality to the Essex or to relate the verticality on the front um to the Clevelander there is a relationship in geometries on the Clevelander which is broken into three vertical um design elements on the Essex on Collins there is a relationship on the horizontality as we also did in part of your package we submitted um massing um relationship do we have that in here yeah yeah it ah so this is the the plans showing how it is that we are proposing to basically demolish the addition it was built parallel to the alley and that's where the core would be for the new um residences we would use the rooftops of the Essex and the rooftops of The Clevelander um to propose our amenity pool areas so that the ground level which is public will remain more public and the residences would have their private uh rooftop um spaces and the building steps up um to be basically over the alley and to give the maximum amount of setbacks from the public rideways both the Collins Avenue and from uh Ocean Drive having said that um we did a massing just to show you historically currently um there are and historically have been buildings in this community which have been over a 100 feet um it shows uh for example the Netherland over 120 it shows the tides um and so forth in this community um but again the from a historic standpoint what I think is very unique and special is that we have an opportunity to capture the public spaces of the Essex and The Clevelander with a residential component on top that hopefully we can all work together um in a uniform and find a a solution that works for the community and as well for the development thank you thank you for your time great thank you very much um before we get to board comment I just want to see if the staff if we can get um just some a little more clarification on how this how this came to this board from land use like what their conversation was what a summary of what they were what they're asking us to to do for them and also one other thing that I'd love to hear a little bit more about is um if there's any conver anything about this uh the settlement um agreement and develop and uh and devel settlement agreement um I think with that I'm going to turn that over to uh Nick ceris Deputy City attorney thank thank you Debbie um yeah I think you know a couple thoughts so so for purposes of of this discussion item um the board should feel that that you have a a full and free opportunity to to weigh in and ask questions and provide comments to the property owner um you know don't don't let the the context um that the that the that the applicant has described you know don't let that um uh sway you one way or the other on the on the design uh feedback that you would typically give a property owner who is seeking your feedback um that said the the developer has approached the city um as Mr tachas described to you with a with a with a proposed development agreement uh where if the uh the city commission adopted certain uh uh text amendments to to the code and if the uh if the the the historic preservation board uh approved a project right um then the that the that the applicant was satisfied with then the applicant would would agree to settle certain uh claims you know withdraw the the uh the live local application and abandon certain rights under its uh its conditional use permit so um so that is the context um but that context should not change how the board uh reviews this this proposal and and the proposal is is not before you as a formal application as as that be indicated this is not a qua judicial public hearing your comments today are are not binding um but but you know but but what is before you is a is a is is a concept um the applicant is seeking your feedback and and and you should feel free to to uh to to provide your feedback um I do just want to respond to one one legal point that that Mr Tash was raised which which is um that the city has never refused to to process um an application or provide feedback to the applicant in fact we've met with the applicant on several occasions the last meeting I thought was was um was you know was was fairly constructive in that in that staff provided input and and and the applicant and and and their their architect engaged in in a in what seemed to me to be a very thoughtful discussion so uh we've never refused to process an application uh when when the live local act application was submitted um we responded promptly and identified uh you know several things that that would need to be that would need to change in order to to comply with uh the live local act and our code but we we've never refused to process an application is um the city code the city commission has adopted code amendments um to address the live local act but but none of those amend amendments would operate to prohibit a a live local application uh where one may otherwise be filed and if you have any other questions for me I'm I'm happy to answer them okay go ahead okay so we're I think I think we're good and Brian you want to start anybody else oh go ahead um okay so I have a I have a few questions for multiple parties but I'll try try to address that the potential applicant first um so that's an incredible project that you guys have in historic U Montreal I I love it it's I really do appreciate you giving us kind of how that the process of how that happened and what you included um and how you guys got to yes because I think that's always important in you know when you're working in a public private capacity um my question for you on this site is is well I guess I mean how many square feet were you dealing with there versus here because I'm I'm just wondering how you're going to be able to you know on that site to accomplish all the things that you want to accomplish which you know there are some very laudable goals um you know we there are times in the city's history where we've given you know there have been other things that have happened recently let's say in the recent past where a developer was given the ability to build you know more density higher structure and then they built a park for example and then that Park was you know there has been some push back to what how how fantastic of an amenity that Park is and whether you know people use it and whether it was worth that exchange right so I'm really curious about that exchange because we're ultimately here to create a better City a more livable City to allow you guys to build a fantastic project but I sometimes think that in you know from this stage is kind of like the really the most important part to kind of get on record what it is that you guys are going to do for the public here you know what you know beyond the platitudes Beyond you know all you know those kinds of things what is it that you're going to to have here with this restaurant with this park you know whatever it is it doesn't really it seems a little vague right now I understand that you haven't you know designed it but I'm curious to just hear kind of what you think that contribution will look like sure sure um so back to much so it was a million square foot development and this one we're under I think we're at about 180,000 feet in what we're proposing uh including the historic existing historic buildings so it's a different scale um we're also uh assuming that we're going to be able to attract a market that does not exist in this area of ocean Drive which is a higher end residential um Market we find it south of 5ifth we find it north of 15th but we certainly don't find it in this 10 city block area whatsoever um so our financial modeling assumes a significant um increase on whatever you know pricing would be on residential real estate in that area right now so that being said in order to discuss proffers and and what we can do um I think there's two sides to it so first one is what's in our immediate control and that's the existing buildings and how they are important uh to the community so number one um preserving and keeping the public space inside ex each existing building is very important so for example the Essex Lobby is a very important contributing um uh component of the historic nature of the neighborhood and if you ever go in there there's tours all day long coming in bringing tourists and bringing people that are of Interest the issue with turning that Lobby to residential either under live local or another scenario is most condo owners are not going to want people running tours through their through their Lobby so in this scenario here what we are proposing is keeping the S6 as a hotel so the lower historic the the floors that are historic and lower level would be hotel that Lobby would remain open it would obviously be enhanced uh it would be a higher end Hotel than it is today um but that access would would be would be always open for the public the same would be said for the Clevelander access on Ocean Drive for the lobby um which would make we haven't finalized the plans but it would make it would be a component of the restaurant that we're proposing um to replace the Clevelander which would be um a higher end still fun and exciting restaurant but not a you know 5 a.m. you know current status restaurant that you see now also the you know a lot of people Overlook the the landscape the actual feature of Clevelander on the pool patio deck there's a couple of very important historic elements there that we would preserve uh and enhance and celebrate as part of the history of the project so all those things are not only are they integral they're kind of part of either project right we're try we want to we want to kind of continue that um celebration of the of the Heritage and enhance it and preserve it as Kobe said in perpetuity what happens thereafter so you know in terms of in terms of what other Prof we can we've had different discussions with different Commissioners we've had discussions with mbpl I think there's a lot of things that we would consider I think there's a lot of really creative ideas especially you know how close we are across the street um to a basically a museum facility and how we could maybe integrate that somehow um but we need to know what does this project look like is it is it in fact the project that Kobe is proposing or are we going to be you know asked to reduce height and massing to a point where you know it may not be financially feasible to even go ahead with the project so all those things are are are aligned and integrated I think what we need is to understand okay what does this project look like in terms of height and massing and then from there I think we can determine you know this is what we're able to do from a from a uh from a profer standpoint for the overall neighborhood if that makes sense yeah I mean I would just flip it a little bit back to you and I would say of the what I'm what I'm hearing you say and just let me know if I'm understanding this correctly is that the Essex is I mean that would operate as a hotel you would leave it as as such it would not be in this kind of public benefit you know what that's the bucket that I'm going to call it right so I'm just curious what kind of square footage floor plate are we talking about for this public amenity Landscaping Hardscape the you know the Clevelander pool that we all you know know are there and I that was another question I had actually for Debbie on this one is if you could also just illuminate for us all maybe like the top five or 10 things that are very important about this this building because I'm not sure that I understand them I mean I've walked by it a million times but I just want to understand the full um depth of the historical resources here okay absolutely so we're dealing with with two properties basically um that are part of this the S6 house house and the the Cleveland or on Ocean Drive so we have the Collins Avenue property um I could probably talk for an hour so I'll be quick the Essex House is an extraordinarily significant uh streamline modar building which was a later um derivation of the art deco period it picked up on uh the Innovations and transportation at the time in the late 1930s um and this is very evident with this corner design building um there's a handful of these very prominent Corner design buildings along Collins Avenue um and the Essex House is probably the most well preserved the public interior of the building is also pristinely preserved I I had a couple students meet me out um in this area a few weeks ago and of course one of the stops was to go inside the Essex House and explain um how our Deco Interiors were originally uh designed the Clevelander is also an art EO building um this is important due to in its own right due to its architectural merits but also as a member of the Ocean Drive landscape um this very important view um that a lot of us see now when we when we fly in on an airplane right the flight patterns actually um some of of them go over Ocean Drive um and that uh silhouette that for lack of a better term postcard which we hear a lot um is really the identity of the Art Deco district the national register District in Miami Beach so I think both of these buildings contribute very strongly to the identity of our historic architecture I mean there's no doubt about it these um you know Collective L Ocean Drive but these two buildings um are also very indicative of what our um architectural Legacy is it's it's you know the art deco and the streamlined period of architecture that we're known for these are two prime examples of that and they're also in a context that has a high concentration of our Deco and streamline buildings so it's not just individual buildings that are important it's also the context of both Ocean Drive and Collins Avenue that um are highly significant uh Brian could I comment as well sure so uh Debbie thank you I just wanted to follow up on on a couple of things that Anthony was talking about so in terms of the public benefit one of the massive public benefits is the giving up of our outdoor entertainment cup so we have the ability to have a cup in perpetuity so it's it could be 20 30 40 Years of 5: a.m. outro entertainment no one is forcing us to do that and we would be voluntarily abandoning one of the highest grossing bars in the United States um the policy makers of the city hundreds of times have indicated that they prefer uh that that bar be closed um so that's a that's a huge give on our part as far as the other public profits of the type you were describing normally when developers are having those discussions there are some preliminary conceptual approval on a project and then before it it goes over the Finish Line there is some discussion between what a commission wants and and what policy makers want and what profit can be given I do zoning work all over South Florida and that's generally the way it works unfortunately we are not we haven't been able to get to that first step yet where there's some conceptual Buy in about what can be put on the site when and if we're there you know we're certainly happy to discuss a whole menu of of U of community benefits Ray would you like to go well um in the presentation you said that you you're giving up the live local work act and and what are you actually building here I mean are they going to be high-end Condominiums Apartments is it going to be part of a hotel uh you know you haven't really explained that to us and number two our job here is simply to look at design and see how it fits in F and all of that comes from the commission and you now have to look at 67th of the vote of the commission to change the F so you can't be looking to us to talk about F you can only look to us regarding the design and you know I I like the project you know that I see here it looks like a floating island there's no Greenery there's nothing that shows us how this really relates to us but the outside area that is currently the hottest bar in in in the United States or whatever you know you've still show that area but you don't show what you're going to be really doing with it you talked about a restaurant and then I heard you say maybe it'll still be open till 5:00 a.m. no you know I did hear that but you know the you know so uh we are going to be happy to look at a project that you ultimately bring to us and we understand that there will be a height to it that doesn't necessarily match the ex the properties adjacent to it but do match properties in the proximity of the area but that's really all that we can look at when you come back to us and I don't really know what what anybody was looking for us to discuss today because we don't have the controls thank you yeah maybe if I just comment to that a few clarifying points and I recognize that I think that we got some very good uh advice from the chair when we spoke to him last week it's it's you know this meeting maybe a little bit out of context because what we need to know are things that are not necessarily um available today to to discuss from a design perspective what I can say is that um we purposefully kept massing massing and did not go that next step to say okay what do the facades look like and how do we try to integrate this with the neighborhood because that's just a whole that's the next big complicated can of worms that we have to open because there's a lot of different opinions on how to do that the point is the intention is to work in collaboration on that process um live local uh the live local project would be higher end residential within the tower that's facing the ocean with the views that's why you would get the revenue from that and the affordable housing would be typically lower level um in the uh on the S6 component of the project uh and that that would be the makeup of live local project because you have to have 40% of units as affordable um mind you these are not this is not it's it's affordable but in the context of it I think this the minimum Studio price would be $2,200 a month so it's affordable within uh within uh reason um but to the project that we're trying to work collaboratively right now it would be a high-end residential project not a lot of units so not high density um and as I had mentioned the lower floors of the S6 would remain a hotel and the concept would be we'd bring a hotel brand onto the overall project that would help brand the overall experience the restaurants would work under that brand as well as the hotel rooms and then the residential component would be tied to the brand but they're obviously independent uh Condominiums owned uh by individuals there would be no short-term rentals that's not an intention whatsoever here um but that would be the that would be the context of how that would be on the ground floor the vision really is to we're we're we had this discussion with you uh Brian like we we have a vision for what that restaurant can be we know it's not Clevelander in its current status it's not a 5 am. bar with you know DJs and and and loud music Etc it's going to fit the context of the overall project so it would be a higher end um upscale experience but not not boring either we are on Ocean Drive so we try to create an environment that's still fun and exciting um but so you're trying to move South at fifth a little bit north yeah or or yeah or bring back or bring back you know an era of Ocean Drive that once was celebrated that you know I don't think we find as much today so so I think that's that's the objective here right if I could just uh add one one note on what you described before about what the board can and can't do and and Debbie and Nick can correct me if they like so the when we were in front of land use we were already discussing the concept of going aboveall 50 feet in height and when we met with staff we were already discussing a concept of going above 50 fet in height um and the F we were also discussing a concept exceeding that I think what the land use committee was looking for was their historic board that that is you know their Advisory board on all things historic to weigh in on what could be done from a height and massing standpoint while at the same time preserving the historic character of the area so I wouldn't limit yourself in terms of saying we have to just look at what the laws are right now I think that that you know and again Nick and and Debbie can correct me but this is kind of an open slate for you guys and then the langage committee wants your feedback because you are the expert in historic preservation um in terms of saying well what can work here given you know all the circumstances okay thank you uh Lindsay yes Debbie you're passing it on to Debbie well I mean yeah I mean hi and massing is part and partial to your review right it's mentioned multiple times in your review criteria so I think um what the land use committee wanted to do was really get the board's initial um feeling about the compatibility of this you know it's not clear what their the proposed height is in these latest uh renderings but it's 14 stories so I would I would 160 I believe the last avitable floor um and the currently allowed height is 50 ft so you can see projects uh the latest project that we had built was the Gabriel hotel that was at 50 ft so this proposal would be um you know significantly you know more than triple the allowable height for an addition so I think the land use committee wanted the board to chime in on on you know what would be an appropriate height for an addition um maybe it's not 50 maybe it's not 100 maybe it's not 150 but just to to try to understand some of the board's comments with you know in reaction to this massing and height okay B based on that you know if you look at the projects that came before us with the Raleigh and the Shore Club and and the uh um Ritz Ritz Carlton everybody comes to was saying don't allow these towers to be built and they weren't even asking for variances on height that stretch of the uh uh on cins Avenue allows 200 feet uh and you know and there were still residents coming here thinking that we should be you know making it less and and we made it clear to them that we're not the body that determines the height the body that determines the height is is is the commission changing height requirement and and if you start doing spot zoning like this if you turn around say okay we can go to a higher height for this project because we like it but then somebody next door wants to build a higher project and we say no I think we don't have the right to do that somebody has to decide we're going to change the height of that entire area to whatever it's going to be you can't just turn around say oh let's make this project you know 160 ft and and let it go with that it's spot zoning and I I I find it difficult for us to decide we can do that I I'd like to get everybody's opinion and so I think I'm just going to we'll start with Lindsay and we'll just go right down the right down the line all right so for purposes of the discussion here I'm going to operate with an assumption that those some of those things are addressed in the development and settlement agreement um you've represented some of the things and you know should the city decide to go that out what will be presented to us is going to be supp to come to us before uh for approval but some of those things may be addressed by the settlement agreement I don't know because we don't have that in front of us at this moment um what I can say is that so this is just I guess feedback for when you come back before us which I think is really ultimately what you're seeking um and Kobe knows some of this because I've said some of this before um you know what I would like to see and I don't get from this I mean it's I know it's not a full presentation but I don't get from this is the context right I can see it in context of the existing of the existing buildings The Clevelander and the asex but I can't see it in context everything else and even the you put up in your presentation a slide that showed other buildings at certain Heights in the area but it was like an aerial shot I believe you I can't really see okay so what does this building look like in context with those other buildings um the other thing that I can't see um is is what given where the massing of this new structure is what kind of Shadows that's going to cast on lumus Park which is another one of our historic resources in the city right um so I think something that we have to you know protect uh and just I don't know that it changes anything but just wanting to know what that is so that we can kind of have a full picture um and then personally and again not necessarily within our scope but what I would like to understand is you talked about the condos and I'm going to use these words incorrectly in this term but like the intensity on our resources in that District as far as um uh the infrastructure and whatnot I know that's there's been a lot of talk about that I don't know um how many units if they're condos right in the new development uh how many of those are and what type of impact that is on you know arguably somewhat taxed resources that we already have on the city um if anybody here C through you know water went out Barefoot this morning to get to their car like me um you know ju just something to kind of keep in mind so those are the kind of things that I would like to see and I I already sent uh your attorney an apology this morning but our our wires got crossed I got the cancellation of our meeting but not his email asking if we could still keep it on at a certain time um but anyways but I I appreciate you guys coming before us today um and I look forward to seeing you know what you have um thank you Lindsay for all the questions you asked because they were very right and Target uh I have just a couple of questions for my personal understanding the 50 Foot height allowable it's more or less what the Clevelander has nowadays and um so if they were not asking anything what would be the F allowed and how much that would give them the uh maximum allowable F today is a 2.0 and they are asking for I don't know so the this Mass modeling that you pre presented today what would be the it's about 5.0 so like twice as much okay thank you can I just add one more thing yes no I mean I do understand that we want to change the character of Ocean Drive and um we can stop progress and we cannot live in the past but I don't think we should also destroy the past for the sake of the future especially in Ocean Drive that a lot of the Revival and the survival of Miami Beach depends on I mean in the past historically it was brought up by Ocean Drive and I think if you want to re keep our images as a thriving uh community that attracts people from all over because of the gems we have here we need to be cognizant of that and protect that but that doesn't mean that we should not keep space for progress or change but that change cannot destroy what's in place and that's one of the concerns I have when you put a 14 story building which is even though we step back to cut a little bit the mess and so for trying to be more uh friendly to the existing buildings I'm afraid that that's completely overwhelming what's in there and we lose the balance between the new and the old and the old becomes kind of irrelevant in that sense okay Brian um I another I have another question for Debbie uh and for staff on the the slide where um Anthony brought up the um neighborhood context could you could we go through those seven buildings that they have there yes and could you perhaps give us your opinion on on the the anal you know whether that's analogous or not and the specific um circumstances of those buildings perhaps in just a summary form so we can understand relates sure in in general staff has some concerns about this diagram um and I don't know if we can go through each of the building my eyes are not that good anymore but in general I think there's a lot of discrepancy with regard to number one how height is being measured here um height is required to be measured to the roof not to the highest projection we have buildings like the tides that have a projection above the roof which is really a decorative projection um so so this particular building if they're saying it's 100 ft or they or 180 ft we I don't know if they're measuring to the roof or to the top of the mechanical equipment which can go to 25 ft above the roof so I think with some of these buildings it appears based on our just very cursory review that they're measuring to the top of the highest architectural feature which are usually with the historic buildings stepped in set back and are are decorative and very indicative of the our Deco style of architecture I think there's another concern with regard to how height is measured so with a historic building or any building um that was not built with the base flood plus free board we would measure height from grade new buildings that have a finished floor located at base flood plus freeboard are measured from that point free board can be up to 13 ft NG gbd so it would be base flood plus 5 so that's how we would measure so I think to I think it was um was it Lindsay's point or Elizabeth's point about a context elevation that would would show what you perceive as the height is different than necessarily those numbers because perception of height you know if you're measuring one building from grade and one building from from 13 they may be the same height but that building that's measured from 13 is going to be perceived as taller um so we did take a look at this this diagram because I think this was shown to us previously and first of all we cannot verify the accuracy of it um but we did look at some previous building uh permit plans for for example for the tides Hotel um that showed a different lower height and I think the discrepancy may be how it's being measured and then just to press you a little further on the floor plate on the ground level on your vision for your that development what do you see as the public area the semi-public area the private areas what you know I'm going to take I'm going to kind of argue with my uh colleague here Ray I I actually do want to understand this before um you know that I want to understand kind of where your vision is what you're what you're looking to do there CU right now it's just vague I I understand it's not you know fully rendered but how do you foresee that you know this this operating do you are you going to do anything special or there other models that you can point to of of other developments that that you know would reminisce this can I pull the um presentation back up if possible I'll just go to the floor it'll be easier to explain from the floor plan and again I'm not pretending that we have everything figured out and solved for right now but and then maybe also on The Branding as well you had mentioned that you were talking to a few Flags like who are you we we're not we have not engaged in in in real discussions with flags we're we're we're operators and owners of all the major Flags in hotels that we own across the world from Marriott to Hyatt to Hilton um we know firsthand from interests of people that have come to us uh there there would be strong interest for this obviously with an up scale uh experience um but we're not we're definitely not that far down the path as of yet um just if we look at the floor plan did someone say that you could point at this was that or no I think is there a touchpad there on there we go there we go you got it so no I guess not on oh no there's the there's the there's the uh cursor you I just Ed the cursor there you go sorry I'm technological a little behind the times okay so here we have the lobby of the Essex um that would be preserved and remain open for uh this would be the hotel lobby and that would remain open to the public at all times there's currently a restaurant utilizing this space right now which would not be um consistent with the restaurant that we'd want tied to that hotel so that also would be publicly accessible so all this Frontage which historically has been um these are all guest rooms so that obviously would be not accessible there is a outdoor um Terrace Corridor coming through here which again for probably Public Safety that probably would not be accessible as it's not today other than for hotel guests uh we come across the alley the main access point for the residential component would be in here so this would be private okay so that would be the component where you walk into your residential building and there would be a a front deskman Etc and you would come up into your your units these hotels uh sorry these elevators for a number of the units would be direct entry stre into the unit itself so the security on the ground floor is obviously Paramount to ensure you're not letting people go up to the levels of people's condos but basically everything else you see here so everything in the in the historic Clevelander which would include a kitchen so I guess that's not publicly accessible but that's where the kitchen is today all of this would be accessible and then all the pool patio would remain accessible as well as a restaurant venue um the intention would be to would be to keep the pool feature um The Clevelander sign sits on top of this element here and there's this the UFO uh as they call it which is an historic component as well would be retained and preserved and this Pond uh directly in front is historical and that would be retained and preserved um this was added later days so I'm not sure what would we would do um whether we'd retain that or change it Etc but the idea is the tower is sitting Kobe I think we're 25 feet above this like we we really lifted up that ground floor so that even though this could be one idea is this becomes a covered space glassed in so you're still seeing through it but then at least you've got protection from the elements in terms of dining experience Etc um but the idea is really celebrate the the property I mean the thing that gives it value is its historic nature so so that would be the intention it makes it makes sense from a cultural perspective but also from a financial perspective is to celebrate what this thing you know is and has been for all these all these years so that's that and as I mentioned on the on the on the concept behind the restaurant it's not very far Advanced but you know we've talked about a few models that that may make sense and and I think part of it also as we've seen is with the rise of Brickle and Windwood and even going up to you know Fort Lauderdale there's been a large draw of people away from South Beach where South Beach was where everyone always went so I think it's a question of saying okay well how do you just how do you improve the game and create something that's attractive for these people that are going to some of these newer Concepts and some of these newer in some of these newer areas but again the the the great thing about this is that you don't sell a single residential unit unless someone wants to be there and they're not going to want to be there if it's a terrible experience on the ground floor and they're not going to want to be there if the architecture isn't great and they're not going to want to be there if everyone's opposed to it right which is why we want to create something that's you know exciting that people support because that's the only way that you're actually going to be successful with the project okay uh Laura would you like to thank you so much uh for being here all the way from Montreal hopefully it gets a little sunnier for you um you know I think I I Echo all of the the comments I can clearly see how much work has been done up to this point from the original iteration um so I do appreciate you know setting for me personally the setbacks are um when we talk about Contex of historic preservation are extremely important pushing everything more towards the back and and center of the the combined site is um I think much more appropriate um I do think how you're dealing with the two you know truly iconic um ex tier and Interiors of the Essex and um what remains of the of the Clevelander is um exceptional and I would definitely encourage you to highlight that in future uh presentations um when you did discuss you know rebalancing the neighborhood I really appreciated that comment um so I think for me personally I'm sure the commission who you know is is outside our jurisdiction um talking about that is extremely important um in the context of the the overall development um you know clearly a 50 foot height limit um and what you're presenting from a historic preservation you know it's it is out of context so I would definitely encourage you to and I do see that you guys already reduced from 30 to 18 um really looking at the financial models to to understand you know if if it could be reduced anymore I think that would um I'm sure you have already but um you know again you're you're talking about quite a quite a large um impact to to you know an iconic streetcape um the context map I think was extremely important important if there could be just like a very simple kind of um you know plain um line drawing of how this fits into others that are in the historic district that are clearly above that 100 foot um kind of limit I think just that simple um drawing would be very um advantageous to this board to to understand the context um of it within the historic district um but overall you know I I I do see a definitely a progression and I would just encourage you to you know the same care that you put in in the project in Montreal um in terms of materiality setbacks height context um really talking about the the two iconic structures that would be impacted and how even during construction they'll be taken care of um I think all of that will will go a long way thank you thank thank you hco I've spoken to Mr O'Brien previously and uh Kobe and Mr tachas and I expressed my concerns um I don't think I at this point I need to reiterate what I had said primarily I talked about the height of the structure uh in context with the rest of the iconic look that we have in on Ocean Drive that's been around for 70 80 90 years this will forever alter it for us to come in at this point and say uh I guess we could give our feedback in terms of how much higher we would allow or or we would like to see you're talking about an F of five where it's currently I think that's what you stated where it's currently at two the renderings do not show whether the building um goes above the SX building the new building or is it just on the empty portion of the Clevelander space can you talk about that for a moment sure it actually it do here let me if I can pull up the screen again that's okay um so here just they're not superimposed so here you can see the ground floor floor plate and as we progress through the building what you can see is yes the the to get the setback we're really using the way to try and pull it off Ocean Drive so um the column line you can see would be on the exterior of the historic ess6 across the alleyway on that first um massing of of the Tower and then as it comes back around the corner it steps back further and further and the last piece of massing will actually uh encroach over the top of the Annex Building um which was a later build on the site uh and so we felt that was the most appropriate way to position the massing to avoid as best we could um the most histor the most historic elements right I don't know if that if that's we talked also about your business model having worked when you purchased the building and why it no longer works and can you elaborate on that for a moment it's a long story but uh we we we paid a very large amount of money for this both Essex and Clevelander when we bought it about seven years ago um and and this was the year after uh the the alcohol roll back had gone to bo uh and it was knocked down so we bought the building thinking you know the arguments historically about you know alcohol hours Etc in Miami Beach were done and behind us and again this has really nothing to do with the context of this board but it's important for the context of the business we made our business decision uh assuming the highly profitable business that is largely driven by food and beverage sales of The Clevelander um would remain in in perpetuity and with our operational skills would' be able to enhance it further and so it was a good investment uh the one thing we saw though was a great potential because in this area of Miami Beach all of these buildings are smaller you have a lot of hotels that are 40 to 60 rooms really really hard to make money um on a 40 to 60 room Hotel so the best is when you get above 100 rooms because you still have to have the same front desk the same housekeeping Etc so it's a question of economies of scale so our strategy was how do we combine Essex and Cleveland and it wasn't some brilliant concept the tides did it the Betsy did it um and so and this went in front of your board a number of years ago because the first thing we did after we bought was started to design um an integration of the two properties together and so we added a little bit of height and rooms to the Annex Building of the ess6 and created a bridge that connected the two and the idea was brand it all under one uh concept and run it all out of one desk and Achieve economies of scale that was around the same time that we started to get um I guess uh undue pressure from the political system for the type of operation Etc and that was a you know it was like a 15 or 17 million project that we stopped because we didn't know what our future looked like so instead of investing into the assets further and creating a better experience and going a bit higher in on the hotel we stopped and unfortunately have been in the cross hairs of um you know uh certain parties at since that time so so this wasn't a decision that we made yesterday what when Liv local came we saw oh now there's actually an opportunity for us to change the business model that could make Financial sense so that's the the long history hopefully in not too too long a period of time I think the height is what's dictating the amount of square footage that essentially you're adding right and have you come to look at it from a different standpoint is how much do you need in terms of additional area to make your business model look the way it did when you essentially purchased the property that's exactly what we've been doing so that's all these massing studies and everything we've gone through is is so we we run the massing study then we run it through our financial team we look at the performa does it make sense does it make does it not make sense and and that's why there's kind of like a point we haven't gone Beyond like when someone says 75 feet doesn't work not it's not gonna 100 feet it's not going to pencil like it's it's that's the issue is is there's only so much and and the issue is exasperated because the higher your residential unit the higher price you get from it so you benefit that's the square footage that's the most the most valuable so um yeah that's the Crux of the financial situation right now how many square feet are you proposing to add uh we're I think the existing don't quote me but I think the existing is approximately 50,000 Square ft and the total would be 177 so the additional is kind in that is that more or less correct a little over 100,000 feet of additional not gross right so including hallways and mechanical and all that good stuff how many residential units are you looking at so uh I don't I don't have the the count on the most recent it's it's under 100 so when we talk about the impact on the neighborhood first of all Cleveland is like a 700 person venue so that gone is a huge impact on traffic Etc so no matter what we do in the building that's a major positive effect for the neighborhood um we would Pro I can't remember the exact number but we'd be under 100 residential units so again these would be larger units less people the impact would be nowhere near what the current uh what the current building has so I don't think that's going to be a major concern thank you you right um would M of on Zoom we have uh Julie isacon welcome Julie Julie can you unmute yourself oh she put her hi I'm unmuted I'm sorry about that good afternoon thank you very much for allowing cou public comment this is Julie isacson I reside at 85015 Street um the name resident of Miami Beach for 32 years um with all due respect to the beautiful Montreal project and I've mentioned this at another meeting previously about two months ago we love that but Montreal is not South Beach um there are a lot of issues with this particular project um starting with the most important issue being that we are in a big fight for historic preservation in our city the we all know that Tallahassee has U passed some laws at are obstructing our uh historic preservation and we did manage to have Ocean Drive carved out of that and placed and kept on the National Historic registration uh National Historic registry um this would could possibly cause a huge issue with that we can be derailed and taken off of the National Historic preservation registry that to me is a huge alarm uh this is our postcard this is our our beautiful postcard that draws all the tourism with our Arco District secondly the building is just out of it's just too big and it is out of range it is just an eyesore sizewise and I agree with the person who talked about the uh shadows and the overshadowing on lumus Park and then they're talking about Workforce housing and $22,000 a month is not exactly a Workforce housing even though I know that this particular topic doesn't really have anything to do with it with the cost of living however using the live live live local act um I just think that that's overstepping the boundaries right now especially with that that kind of rate um again not uh thinking about uh historic preservation again but I don't know how they're going to have a restaurant in a in a in a hotel with no liquor license as they're saying that they're going to give up their liquor license and lastly um well not lastly yet um these code amendments and all of these um variances that are being requested could cause a major rash of other people doing the same thing and we don't want that to happen and then now lastly and also very importantly our environment there's going to then there's going to be Construction Construction Construction Construction and we are in a very serious situation and a serious position when it comes to SE rise level and a project like that is just not conducive to that uh that either so thank you very much for your time I appreciate everything that you are all doing and have a good day thank you okay thank you Daniel Calo with Miami Design preservation league so um obviously we appreciate the study we have met with the Clevelander team many times they're very nice people um but our our purview our role we think your role as well is really being stewards of the Art Deco district and it's not about taking every building having the developers come and say well we did our own study we can't share the the financial numbers but you know it's got to be this tall and this big because that's the only way it's going to work out that to me is kind of Planning by lawsuit and Zoning by settlement and it's really not what we should be doing if we really want to have a master plan change there needs to be a new vision of that whole area and we can't be just addressing things like this and saying that well if you let us build this and we might close a bar but we'll still have a restaurant and maybe we'll have alcohol and maybe it'll still be open till five but it it won't be that bad you'll see in 10 years that's not I think the route we want to take uh for this economic engine that we have I also wanted to mention that the live local proposal the planning director has a letter that he sent to the Clevelander about why it's not legal so I don't want them to be hanging this over you with that huge Kobe carb rendering saying well if you don't take this then you know we're going to do that I think that the land use have been at every meeting that they've had there is not consensus on the height you know last time we were there they said this height is our best and final and I went to the Landes I said if this is our best and final I I think it's time to say thank you move on to your already approved project that some of you were here it's a great project to add on to the hotel so I don't know if it's possible to to make a resolution that it's not in context going over the maximum height but we would like that because we think that there's a lot of other opportunities for the site but if we're dangling this big idea to them that we're going to Triple everything it's not really fair to them or to the neighborhood final thing is that the silhouette of the essic is against the sky you know we're making our next exhibit is on Henry ho Houser so I've been setting this building and its history and there's a reason why the master plan had 50 feet for new construction it was to maintain some of that openness of of the view corridors the sunset and the sunrise that we all see so uh we remain against this height increase and we hope that um we can dispense of this and move forward within the zoning and see what opportunities there could be without um destroying our postcard thank you thank you anybody anybody else here to speak on us no all right well I think um I'll I'll just add that um I had a very good conversation with the with the team with the architect I appreciate you guys and um you know I kind of was hoping because I knew this conversation is really one for the land use and sustainability committee to hear kind of our opinions um and obviously there have been a lot of a lot of uh you know support for the work that you've done elsewhere the historic your your interest in historic preservation the Montreal uh work and your interest in preserving the eics and The Clevelander I I do think that um our board is really designed to kind of talk about the historic context um and as the as the thing that's front and center to our interests and that's the massing and the height and I think there's a lot of work to be done still on the massing and the height to come to a place where this whatever is added to this will be um will be uh supporting and promoting the historic context and um you know I just I think we talked in the conversation we I think we might I might have mentioned that this was kind of like a smile that you know you're kind of adding a disfigured tooth to this smile that is Miami Beach the Ocean Drive kind of smile I'm like who would want to do that what would you have to give them to give up a beautiful smile and I I still think that I think some of the questions were kind of asking you about that a little a little more specifically but um and so that might uh be a help but I still don't think losing that smile is uh especially if that's all this board is really intended to do is to kind of help support the economic engine that is historic preservation in our city and um you know we know you guys are great stewards of historic properties and so we're kind of counting on you to be great stewards of that you know central location on on Ocean Drive and you've obviously demonstrated that you have the ability and uh the interest and you've got an architect who has incredible skill I so I I I just think that we have that that um that I would encourage you to um dig deep and look at how you can modify the height so that you're within a range that's that staff and the and the members of the land use and sustainability committee can um entertain and also thinking about the the context like how do you how do you see the tower I was I was you know Daniel kind of preempted a com comment that I had about just how we understand Collins and when you're walking North and the Essex is on your right um how you see that how you see that tow in the the Essex Pinnacle the final is uh you know kind of an a special and beautiful moment in our city and um it would be forever changed with the kinds of with some of the proposals that we've seen so far and I'm not saying those are the where you are where you'll end up but uh just maybe you know thinking about how we perceive the the these historic um buildings from uh the various perspectives of see them and we spend a lot of time talking about like a tree blocking a window so that's this board and and so we're not the commission we're not land use um but we really do care about um this historic Heritage and uh it's understanding its um its importance and I'm I'm really kind of encouraging you to talk to work with staff because there are they are our professional they're the professional um opinions that we on as a board to uh to guide us and and it's interesting because in this conversation we haven't really heard staff's opinion like they didn't Express kind of where they stood on height or massing they just said You know here here we are so I I'm um I'm sure you have opportunities to talk to Commissioners all the time about what about what your feel about that but I think from our perspective having this kind of become to feel like it was almost always there I mean that's what you achieved in Montreal it seems um and I think we'd like to see something that uh really highlights the historic context of the of this place and um so anyway those I don't know anybody else have anything they want to add okay so that's where I would end up thank you very much though for would the board like to give any formal um advisory recommendations to the land use committee that's what they were I believe they were asking for oh they were asking for a formal um advisory recommendation with regards specifically to the height and yeah is the is the L sport aware of the 50 Foot height did that come up okay and is the is there a staff recommend is there a staff recommendation on height so we had we've had several meetings um with the the team we have expressed extreme concerns about the proposals that we've seen in terms of the height um we did in our last meeting which I think was heading in the right direction um was talk about massing in terms of setting back in terms of other examples which they have responded to and I think it's it's heading the massing of this is heading in the right direction um I think the 180 ft is something staff still has has contextual concerns with in this particular area yes and did land use have a land they were unhappy with or are they okay um I believe they saw 138 ft um and several of the the committee members did Express concerns about that proposal there was a different massing at that point um the massing has changed and in my opinion has improved um but yeah there has been um expression of concern with regard to the the significant increase in height but I think that's one of the reasons why the land use committee um referred this to you because although you're not a a commission member or a Committee Member um your expertise is is in context and compatibility and appropriateness within the historic district so I think they felt although they had some initial reactions to the height massing that was presented at the last meeting I think they felt that because this is the expert board with regard to compatibility they really and ultimately the project would need to come before you with a formal COA application um I think they wanted to get the temperature of this board as to its um compatibility and contextual not as a project but consistent you know with the height and the massing so I mean I think I brought this up in the things that I would like to see if it came before us as an official certificate of appropriateness but since this is what you're asking for I don't think I have enough information to say whether it's contextual um and I don't want to make a decision right now without that information um that that's that's my opinion Brian did you yeah I mean look I Echo that as well I don't I don't think I have enough information for me it really relies on well a number yeah the context exactly and so actually one question I had for you Debbie is do you have a kind of you know if you were to have a magic wand is there a model is there another building that we should be looking at that you think in this place we need to you know is there is there perhaps some other model that we should be thinking of is it what's too what is too big what is not set back what where is an example where this may have worked I kind of I would like looking at this I feel like I I'm lost because I don't see anything it doesn't it's just I see a setback I see a very imposing building and I don't really see a rationale for how this space is being activated on the ground level I'm not saying that you can't get there I just don't see it here and I don't know enough about the real estate to know which pieces have to be preserved in the high in their highest and best form and how that how that can be done like is there you know for if you told me oh well Raymond jungles is going to come in and he's going to create this connective tissue and it's and it's going to you know span from here to here and go all the way to the block and then we're creating you know it at least it would help me like to understand what I'm what I can even recommend back to the land use committee without that I'm I'm it's pretty tough for me to come up with something yeah and I see why the board is challenged and I and I um sympathize with you very much um because this is not a formal application you don't have nearly the amount of detail that you would have if it was a formal application so this is unique and and you know challenging for for us all um staff is in the same boat to a certain extent we don't have the amount of detail we would typically have um with a formal application that we would issue a a recommendation to this board so you're right um I think Mr chair you said we don't have a formal recommendation to guide the board um because the intent of this was just I think to get your initial reactions um staff has expressed concerns to the applicant with regard to the height um it's hard to you know it's hard to compare this section of the city to other areas like the ocean front areas where you have very deep Lots um and you have a very different context along the ocean then in this situation uh where you have multiple Street frontages um so the context is unique uh the projects we have seen that are you know in in from an architectural perspective at least very successful along Ocean Drive the newer projects um are limited to 50 feet and they work they work great the the addition to the Gabriel is extremely contextual um and you know if you look at the addition that was done here um by T trash that's proposed to be demolished it's 50 ft it's contextual as is the Victor Edition um so I don't think there's a comparable case to this particular uh instance that we can really look at um I you know it is challenging uh to to give any sort of opinion without additional detail especially because that's what we're used to seeing one of the thing oh sorry gr go ahead I I think we have to look at a couple different things remember to revitalize Washington Avenue they allowed them to build higher but you had to have 200 feet of Frontage on on on Washington to be able to build a residential or hotel in the back a previous commission wanted to try and uh add residential to Ocean Drive and Collins Avenue to try and change the Dynamics of O of the tourists that come here and and not having the residential component I think when you add a residential component it's going to require a height variance to do that above the 50 ft but I I think it's up to us to make that decision it's the commission that has to make that decision and then we look at a project but the commiss in order to to be able to have residential when you're trying to preserve the the the hotels that are there currently it's going to require somewhat of a height variance not necessarily 160 feet or whatever but it's going to involve something and I think that um I think we all have to be more cognizant of when we actually do get something in front of us to vote for that that we're looking at whatever has been made whatever changes have been made for the height in that area that's not really up to us up to a Master Plan sorry chair through the chair the Lan use committee is asking us to weigh in on that so that they can make that recommendation and that's why we're saying we don't have enough in so there L committee is kind of I don't know punted the ball to us saying as the people charged with you know preserving you know our historic architecture in our city please tell us what we what we should consider when looking at this development agreement and we're saying or at least I'm saying and I think Brian echoed it that we don't have enough information to provide a recommendation back to them one way or the other that's where I am and and I was that's when I raised my hand when you were talking is I want to be very clear I'm not saying NE neily that I think this is too high I'm not saying necessarily that I think it's in context I'm saying I don't know and I don't want to make a judgment one way or the other in a recommendation to the land use committee that is ultimately going to decide whether this goes forward or not that's where I am got it I was going to propose um kind of on following on you that's why I'm sorry for interrupting you but uh at that moment but um the um you inspired a thought so I was immediately thinking I needed to say it but um it was that maybe there's a new way maybe there's a these drawings have been very challenging to understand because of the floating nature and I think a couple of people have mentioned that uh we often use Seline um sight line studies to understand historic buildings and contexts and maybe um and we were even talking about Seline studies in terms of the essics and how we understand these things so it might be helpful to understand um kind of the whether you're standing in the sidewalk or across the street or you know not you're not a drone floating in the in the sky someplace which none of us will ever experience but you're actually in the community and and those sideline studies can be informative they can help to understand massing where massing will totally stick out where it won't stick out where it will be um how how what a height you know what does what do extra floors mean in terms of your experience um and I you know cuz I my instinct is to think that this is has is much too high and and too massive but I again that's an instinct it's not based on a drawing that's floating out there so I would I think if the if the land use board uh I mean the land use and sustainability committee um could look with staff at sight line studies that there would be an it would be an easier way in some ways it's going to make your job easier and in some ways it's going to make your job harder um but that's what sideline studies are supposed to do it's like what do you see when you're standing in the when you're standing in that context so I don't know if that's a solution in terms of should it be 50 ft or should it be 150 ft or should it be 100,000 square fet or should it be 50,000 ft but I think if you had a method of looking and the method that grow go out of our of our areas of expertise is the sight line studies we're we're always using those um and maybe that's a way to maybe that's a way to start this conversation and and we can certainly bring that back to the land use committee um and and you know you're not required to issue the recommendation it was requested um but certainly I we can uh convey to them that this you know the the presentation was not sufficient in terms of detail for the board to make a recommendation and another thing I would if we're conveying them kind of thoughts uh as opposed to an official kind of thing uh maybe also to kind of ask for a closer look at kind of how infrastructure is impacted in the area because I think we were Elizabeth talked about it Lindsay you talked about it and it's um the infrastructure is is going to be it's going to depend it's going to depend on the things Brian was asking about like what is who's living there are they all coming in in their you know private helicopters and then doing and then do they ever if they never touch the ground then it's going to have very little ground impact but if they do touch the ground it could have a lot of ground impact well I would say not only to that but if you're looking to attract a high-end clientele and they're going to be coming back to you saying how dare you put this building here and it didn't have the infrastructure that it needed that's not a good look for anybody right um but I think those impacts yeah are going to be pretty powerful whether it's parking or whether it's agreements on parking in other locations or maybe it's a world without parking and a series of uh of cars I mean I live in a in a 60s uh 60s building U that's kind of um that was designed to kind of when you came into the hotel you had a a a car that was given you there in the in the Arling King Cole so there's a there's kind of like a history of that going back to our mid-century modern discussion earlier today but um it's but still I think that those those questions are are very important as part of this there they about being in the building as you're presenting it or as you're proposing it and living in it being on that street being on that sidewalk being in the building and those would really help okay we will we will uh transmit that to the committee um and keep you updated okay thank you guys for your presentation thank you thank you thanks much um Mr chair that is all that is on the agenda today um so hopefully we can still um we don't have to swim home I don't know what what's happening outside but it is supposed to be rain for the next few days so everyone be safe um try to keep dry and we'll see you in July thank you very much take care