City Commission - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress. Did he did he eat yours?

Oh, no.

Well, welcome, everybody. Glad you're here. I hope you haven't been too uncomfortable outside. Welcome to global warming. Just remember that they didn't have air conditioning in 1925 or 26. We're all grateful that we're in this room. Good afternoon and welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Coral Gables Historic Preservation Board. Those of us that are here are all residents of the city. Coral Gables and are charged with the preservation and protection of historic or architecturally worthy buildings, structures, sites, neighborhoods, and artifacts, which impart a distinctive historic heritage of the city. The board is comprised of nine members, seven of whom are appointed by the commission, one by the city manager, and the ninth is selected, is it not on? There you go, thank you, is selected and confirmed by the commission. Five members of the board constitute a quorum, and five affirmative votes are necessary for the adoption of any motion. We only have six people here today. Any person who acts as a lobbyist pursuant to the City of Coral Gables Ordinance No. 2006-11 must register with a city clerk prior to engaging in lobbying activities or presentations before city staff, boards, committees, and or the city commission. Copy of the ordinance is available in the Office of the City Clerk. Failure to register and provide proof of registration shall prohibit your ability to present to the Historic Preservation Board on applications under consideration this afternoon. Lobbyist is defined as an individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity employed or retained, whether paid or not, by a principal who seeks to encourage the approval, disapproval, adoption, repeal, passage, defeat or modification of any ordinance, resolution, action or decision of any city commissioner. any action, decision, recommendation of the city manager, any city board or committee, including but not limited to quasi-judicial, advisory board, trust, authority, or council, or any action, decision, or recommendation of the city personnel during the time period of the entire decision-making process on the action, decision, or recommendation which foreseeably will be heard or reviewed by the city commission OR A CITY BOARD OR COMMITTEE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO QUASI-JUDICIAL, ADVISORY BOARD, TRUST, AUTHORITY OR COUNCIL. PRESENTATIONS MADE TO THIS BOARD ARE SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S FALSE CLAIM ORDINANCE CHAPTER 39 OF THE CITY OF CORAL CABLE CITY I now officially call the City of Coral Gables Historic Preservation Board of July 16th to order, and the time is 4.05 p.m. Present today are, on my left, Ms. Ebert, Ms. Rolando, Mr. Silva, and on my right, Ms. Spain and Ms. Alvarez. There are six of us today. The rest are excused and out. Okay, I'd like to move toward the minutes. Let's see. We have some distinguished people in the audience here. We have Ms. Kauth. We have who else? Mr. Torrey. And all of you. Can I have a motion on the minutes, please?

I'll move approval on the minutes.

We have a motion for approval by Mr. Silva. Second, please. Ms. Spain? Second by Ms. Spain. Please call the question.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

OK. We're going to move on to the agenda. We're going to make one little movement here, but it'll be after we go through the historic designations. And so we're going to move the Palmerito, which will be under the special significance of appropriateness, to number one and just move that because that's a rehearing. So we're just going to trade the two of those, but that'll be later in the meeting. Okay, our first item on the agenda is ad valorem tax relief, which is case file A.V. 2025-001, an application requesting ad valorem tax relief for the property at 720 Madeira Avenue, a local historic landmark, legally described as lot seven, block seven, Coral Estates section. According to the Platt book 19 page 7 Miami-Dade records the related special certificates of appropriateness COA SP 2024-040 was granted design approval by the Historic Preservation Board on January 16, 2025. Ms. Cowan. Oh, yes, I missed that part. Okay. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak today that needs to be sworn in? Please stand up and raise your right hand.

Anyone who will be presenting on any of the items being heard today, if you're going to be providing any testimony, please rise and be sworn in.

Thank you.

Mr. Maxwell, can we verify if there's anybody on Zoom? Or should you want to take those one item at a time?

I'm sorry.

Do you want to swear in people on Zoom now or do you want to wait till each item?

If they're available, we can do it now. If not, we can do it when the item comes up.

We can wait till later.

Thank you. Ms. Cal, thank you.

Thank you. If you can bring the PowerPoint up, please. The Singlet Family Home at 720 Madera Avenue, also known as 710 Obispo Avenue, was built in 1937. Located in the Coral Estates subdivision, the home was an unincorporated date at the time of its construction. This area was annexed by Coral Gables in 1948, and there's a location map on the screen. This is the earliest photo that we have of the property, and our early records are a little bit sparse for this because this was an annexed area. Designed the minimal traditional style, the home was designated as a local historic landmark in December of 2024. The applicant is requesting ad valorem tax relief for the renovation of the historic structure and the construction of an addition and alterations to the residence as reflected in the certificate of appropriateness, case file COA SP 2024, which was approved by the Historic Preservation Board on January 16, 2025. It should be noted that only portions of the proposed work will actually apply to the tax exemption, but we're going to show you everything that they did. So I'm going to give you some views around and before and afters of the house as I discuss what they did. So they had new impact-resistant casement windows and doors to match the existing on the house, removal of aluminum awnings, installation of fabric awnings. restoration of original front door and hardware, which you see here, a new white tile roof, painting of the home, removal and or stuccoing of non-original brick planters in the front, Restoration of the arched brick frame portico share as an open-air carport. Cleaning of existing stonework at the north facade. Firework restoration. Stucco repair. Full interior remodeling and renovation of the home and auxiliary structure. Restoration of original wood ceiling and beams. Restoration of original wood and tile floors. New MEP systems. One-story addition that connects the existing residence and the existing auxiliary structure in the rear yard, consisting of a full bath, corridor and master bedroom, which is approximately 285 square feet, which is part of what you see here, and a new rear deck with cascading steps. The site improvements were limited to a new wing wall, aluminum gate, new paper walkways, driveways, wing pool, pool deck, and landscaping. The owner is here, or the contractor is here, and if you'd like to say anything. If not, we recommend approval.

Okay. Board members, any questions? Okay. Please go ahead, Mr. Sullivan.

It's a pleasure to see this project come back to us. A lot of times you don't get to see the finished product. And I think this is a great example of restoration. It's a great example on the economic side as well, so that all folks out there can see that there can be a tax savings, that there is an economic benefit to restoration and renovation as well. So thank you, Mr. Torrey. This is a great project. Great job. And it was it was a quick project as well. So for those folks that say things can happen quickly in the gables, this is an example of what happens when you get a good team together and can accomplish great things. I'm thrilled to recommend the pool.

I'd like to second.

And may I make a comment?

Please.

I thoroughly enjoyed going through this. That backyard. Addition restoration is beautiful.

It's not a big addition, and it made a huge impact on the property. So it's a really nice, well-scaled, really appropriate addition. Lovely.

It's a great project.

Any other comments? I think we all applaud the effort. It's not only superb, but it's really in keeping with our traditions from the early 1920s. It's an excellent project, and we hope to see more like it. Okay, can I have a motion to approve, please? If there's no further, any further, anybody wishes to speak for or against this in the audience? No, hearing none, okay, we'll come back. Any further discussion, board? Okay, hearing none, motion, please.

I will move approval.

Okay. I'll second. Mr. Silva? Do we have a second? Anna? Second. Okay. Ms. Alvarez, okay. So we have a motion and a second.

We have.

All in motion, please. Okay.

Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Spain? Ms. Ebert? Yes.

Yes.

Okay, Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Mr. Silva? Yes. Mr. Maxwell?

Enthusiastically, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much, and thank you for your good work, and keep it up. Okay, we're going to move on to the next two items here, which are local historic designations. We have case file. LHD 2025-006, and case file COASP 26-007. Consideration of local historic designation of the property at 439 Mallorca Avenue, legally described as lot 16 in the west one half of lot 17, block 1, Coral Gables section B. PLATBOOK 5, PAGE 11, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF AN ACCELERATED SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE RESIDENTS, A PERGOLA ADDITION TO THE CARPORT AND SITE WORK.

MR. MAXWELL, BEFORE WE COULD BEGIN, IF WE COULD SWEAR IN EVERYBODY ON ZOOM WHO'S HERE FOR THIS ITEM.

MS. GUINN.

And just for everybody, we're having a little bit of technical issues in the room today. So if everyone could make sure that they speak up and close to the microphone. We have a full room, which is great. And we need to make sure everyone can hear in the back of the room.

Pull it as close to your mouth as you possibly can, unfortunately. Thank you very much.

Ms. Quinn? Yes. Do you swear or affirm the information you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Yes. Thank you. If we could ask IT to turn down that volume actually a little bit. We're having trouble hearing people on Zoom.

Elizabeth Buhlmann, Restoric Reservation Coordinator, and our following presentation is a summary of the Restoric Reservation Report that was created by staff. IT 23 is playing the PowerPoint. Thank you. The property at 439 Majorca Avenue is before you for consideration for designation as a local historic landmark. This is a very early home. It is permit number 31 for the city and built in 1923. As per Article 8, Section 8-103 of the Coral Gables Zoning Code, criteria for designation for local historic landmarks. A landmark must have significant character, interest, or value as part of the historical, cultural, archeological, aesthetic, or architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. For designation, a property must meet one of the criteria outlined in the code. 439 Mallorca Avenue is eligible as a local historic landmark based on three criteria. Historical cultural significance, Criteria four, it exemplifies the historical, cultural, political, economic, or social trends of the community. Architectural significance, criteria one, portrays the environment and era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural style. And criteria two, it embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period or method of construction. 439 Mallorca Avenue is in the Coral Gables Section B on a 75 foot by 128 foot interior lot sitting on the north side of the street between Lejeune Road and Hernando Street. The property contains a single family residence which retains its original style and character. Coral Gables was originally conceived as a Miami suburb and attracted investors from across the nation during the South Florida real estate boom of the 1920s. Founder George Merrick drew on the garden city and city beautiful movements of the 19th and 20th century to create his vision for a fully conceived Mediterranean inspired city. Coral Gables is recognized as one of the first modern play communities in the United States. Coral Gables developmental history is divided into three major historical periods. Built in 1923, 439 Mallorca Avenue is amongst the earliest homes in the city and exemplifies the building upon which Coral Gables was founded. Nationally acclaimed landscape architect Frank Button drew the first comprehensive maps of Coral Gables in 1921-22, one of which is on the left side of this slide. On November 26, 1921, Merrick opened Coral Gables up for sales, auctioning off 300 lots in Section A. Buoyed by this success, on December 27, he held a second auction, offering Section B up for sale and selling 400 lots. Founded on three sides by Grand Thoroughfares, Granada Boulevard to the west, Lejeune Road to the east, and Coral Way to the south, Section B included an array of Merrick's planned features. Larger lots aligned Alhambra Circle and a wide boulevard with a lush center median and the impressive greenway drives that circled the proposed golf course. Also, a large portion of Section B was platted with 50-foot lots that could be bought separately or bundled together, offering both affordable and higher-end options. In April 1922, Merrick extended Alhambra Circle across Lejeune as the main business district thoroughfare. In Section B, the medium of Alhambra Circle became a bridle path. In August of 1922, as part of Merrick's Great Development Plan, the plazas along Coral Way, like Balboa Plaza, were completed and three additional plazas in Section B, Granada Plaza, Alcazar Plaza, and Castile Plaza, were underway. In early 1923, the much anticipated Coral Gables Golf Course and its country club opened. The clubhouse was the community's first public building and became the hub of social activities. All of these amenities and its proximity to the new business district were touted repeatedly in early marketing and defined this area of the city. As a result, Section B developed steadily in the 1920s, and in comparison to other sections, it became a well-developed single-family home area. With the exceptions of the residents along Alhambra Circle and along the Greenways, the homes in Section B were predominantly one-story and moderately priced. Merrick strove for Coral Gables to be a socially mixed Garden City community where people of various socioeconomic levels live side by side in quality homes. Modest residents in the same construction and detail to harmonize the larger Mediterranean Revival style houses were built throughout the city and they were an important piece of Coral Gables' early history. The home at 439 Mallorca Avenue is an early example of Merrick's vision for these homes. Martin and Fannie Mastenbrook commissioned the home in 1923. It is one of the earliest homes in Coral Gables and it is recorded as permit number 31. Martin was born in Holland and upon his arrival in Miami in 1921 he opened his native rock company. He likely supplied the material for the lintel rock features. After moving into their home, Fannie opened the Coral Gables Beauty Shop a few blocks away on Ponce de Leon Boulevard in the New Business District. While original plans or other early building records for the property have not been located to date, photographs such as these dating to 1924 and the 1940s provide some primary documentation. The architect is unknown. However, given the date of construction, it was a member of Merrick's original design team, as they were the only ones designing homes in Coral Gables at the time. 439 Mallorca Avenue is designed in the Mission Revival style. In the 1920s, this style was used sparsely and seemingly only for modest homes, perhaps offering a distinct look for them. The mission revival style was first developed in the 19th century and drew inspiration from the Spanish colonial missions heritage in the Southwest. The resulting mission revival style is characterized by silhouetted shapes that mimic the old Spanish missions with stucco facades punctuated by recessed windows and door openings, arches without moldings, and sparse ornamentation. The most distinctive feature of the Mission Revival style are the curved or shaped parapet features, evoking bell towers and bell gables. Roofs are commonly flat or low pitched with clay tiles. In the 19th century, the style never became popular outside the Southwest. However, in the early 20th century, variants of the style were built in the new suburbs throughout the country, of which Coral Gables was one. Merrick's initial building campaign relied heavily on Spanish precedents, and the Mission Revival style fitted his vision. Listed here and discussed in the designation report are some of the character-defining features of the exterior of the home at 439 Mallorca Avenue. Most notably are the Mission parapet, the Ndobe-inspired textured stucco, the Moorish-inspired pointed arched chimney, segmental arched entry, the rough stone lintels, and the decorative canales. The one story house is built of masonry block units above a crawl space and is clad with adobe inspired textured stucco. Rectangular and plan, the living space is under a flat roof with simple mission style parapets. A slightly protruding articulated base runs along all facades of the home. The restrained ornamentation is typical of the Mission Revival style. In the Mission Revival style window openings are deep without any framing and have protruding sills. Historic photos show that the original windows were single hung encasement in type. They were changed to Jalousies in 1967 and by 1994 to Clearview Casements. Centered above most of the original fenestration openings are decoratively arranged half-round barrel tile vents. Located near each corner are decorative canales. Canales were common in flat-roofed missions. The drain projected through the parapet, directing the water away from the face of the adobe structure. The use of barrel tile and canales features are distinctive mission revival element. There have been two additions to the home. The original rear projecting bay along the east facade was likely the location of the original sleeping porch. In 1960, an addition for a den and a Florida room was wrapped around the northeast corner, largely encapsulating the sleeping porch. The second campaign occurred in 1993. An open-air terrace addition extended the front facade to the east and a carport was built near the northwest corner of the lot. It is not clear if the original garage was demolished during this campaign. Also new entry landings and stairs were added along the rear and side facades of the home. The front facade of the original home is dominated by two Mission Revival style characteristics, the curved parapets and the arched openings. The front facade has two bays, the western living space bay and the slightly protruding front entry porch. Each has a central large opening with a distinctive Mission Revival curved parapet above. A convex pointed parapet adorns the living space, and the typical rounded parapet is above the front and the side entry porch arched openings. The parapet wraps around the porch with battlement quarters. Future windows and doors on Mission Revival style homes are often arched. This house accentuates the openings with rough-faced cut stone. At the living space window, the stone is arranged in a jack arch fashion. The stone was removed or covered at an unknown date. A change in stucco clearly marks its location. At the original entry porch, the stone frames the shallow segmental arch of the front and the east facade. These stone features are extant. As seen in these historic photos, the entry porch was screened by 1940 and then enclosed for living space by 1993. Rising near the southwest corner of the home on the west facade is a projecting and shoulder Moorish-inspired chimney. It demonstrates the broader influence of the Islamic architecture on the Spanish and its incorporation in the Spanish missions. This influence is also seen in the Mission Revival style. The chimney is a hallmark feature of the home. Flanking it were small windows which were blocked up around 2013. The west facade also has a Mission Revival parapet at its center. The photo on the right shows the 1993 steps leading up to the bay that was originally the sleeping porch. The large screen opening of the porch was expanded to accommodate French doors. At the southeast corner of the home, a substantial open-air terrace was added in 1993. Its masonry elements are clad in stucco whose texture is distinctly different from the original 1923 home. Decorative canales were also installed. The terrace is easily distinguishable as an addition. Behind the terrace, the east facade of the 1923 portion of the home largely retains its original configuration and detailing. Since vegetation obscures this facade, a historic photo is provided for reference. A small pop-out bay occurs midway down the facade. It is under a front-facing gable roof clad in barrel tile. Barrel tile is a common feature of the Mission Revival style. In this home, it is used for decorative accent vents and for cladding in the small roof. Another small Mission-style parapet rises along the northern end of the facade. It mirrors the parapets on the west facade. In the 1993 historic photo, the 1960 rear edition is visible in the background. Warping an L at the north end of the east facade is the 1960 rear edition. This edition has simple parapets and is clad in stucco whose texture is visibly different from the adobe inspired texture of the original 1923 home. There is no ornamentation on the addition and the windows have modern proportions. The 1960 edition is clearly differentiated from the original 1923 home and does not adversely impact its historic integrity. A detached garage built contemporaneously with the 1923 home originally stood near the northwest corner of the home. Newspaper ads in the 1930s refer to it as a two-car garage. As seen in the 1924 historic photo, its Mission Revival-style parapet and adobe-inspired textured stucco complemented the home. Property surveys indicate that it was a wood-framed structure. It was demolished sometime after 1978 and before the 1993 alterations campaign. A new carport was erected slightly to the east of the garage's location. The 1993 carport is simple flat-roofed masonry structure clad in textured stucco, which along with its large rectangular openings is like the contemporaneous open-air terrace in the front. The auxiliary structure also reads clearly as a later addition to the property and does not detract from the historic integrity of the property. In conclusion, 439 Mallorca Avenue exemplifies the Spanish-inspired building archetype upon which Coral Gables was founded, and it is also significant as one of a handful examples of the adaptation of the Mission Revival style architecture in George Merrick's planned community. Constructed in 1923, it is one of the earliest homes in the city, and it exemplifies Merrick's vision of modest homes in his socially mixed Garden City community. Hence, the property at 439 Mallorca Avenue is part of a collection of quality buildings that serves as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city. It retains its architectural integrity and significantly contributes to the historic fabric of the city of Coral Gables. Staff recommends approval of the local historic designation of the property at 439 Mallorca Avenue based on its historical, cultural, and architectural significance.

Are there any questions of the staff about this designation or any questions about the report or anything? Okay, hearing none, I'm gonna, are any members of the audience wish to have any pro or con comments on?

Mr. Maxwell, I'm sorry, if you could please move the microphone closer, we're having a lot of trouble hearing you today. Thank you. I know it's not the most, you know, natural feeling, but.

It's quite all right. I'd rather be heard. All right. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this application? If not, we'll come back to the board. Okay. Board comments, questions? Motion?

I'll make a motion to approve.

We have a motion from Ms. Alvarez. Yes.

I'll second it with a comment that I think it's clearly historically significant. I'm surprised that it's existed this long without being designated. But, you know, we're getting it now. Hopefully.

And Ms. Alvarez, Ms. Spain, if I can just confirm that your designation is based on the staff report and for the same criteria outlined in the report?

Absolutely.

Yes. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Okay, we ready for any further discussion? Ready for a vote then? Please call the question.

Mr. Silva? Yes. Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Ebert?

Yes.

Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Ms. Bain? Yes. Mr. Maxwell?

Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much, and congratulations. Okay, we're going to move on to the next item, case file LDH 2025. I'm sorry? Do you want to do the COA? Oh, we have a second one. I apologize. Sorry about that. For the certificate of, yeah. Okay. Cara?

And for the record, this is the COA SP 2026-007.

You put the PowerPoint up, please. This, this is an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property at 439 Majorca Avenue. Now a local historic landmark legally described as lot 16 in the west half of lot 17 block one Coral Gables section B. According to the plat thereof is recorded in plat book five at page 111 of the public records of Miami-Dade County. So, oh, we're going to skip straight to the presentation because you all have just seen all about this property. The application requests design approval for an approximately 350-square-foot, one-story addition to the east of the home that converts an existing open-air pavilion into living space, construction of a trellis-covered terrace to the east of the existing carport, minor alterations to the residence and site work. I did want to just note that the windows of the addition matched the existing clear view which were no muntins on the residence. Those were installed circa 1994. So our feeling is that in the future when the windows on the house are to be replaced, they will be replaced with proper units that staff can help work with them for period appropriate historically accurate windows on the house. And that way the windows on the addition will then be differentiated from the existing historic residence. There are no variances that have been requested with this application. It was approved by the Board of Architects in November of 2025. We did have a number of staff conditions on the last page of your report. Listening to the designation presentation, I did want to add another condition, that the coral stone at the east side door opening is to be retained when the addition is made. So if that can be considered as part of the approval process, I'm going to turn it over to the architect.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rafael Partias, and I'm representing Riora's Architecture Studio. The intention with the addition is just to convert the addition that it was made in 1993 into a living space. And instead of having in the facade that opening with a fabric cover has, just let me move forward. Let me go to the front facade. So it's having the right side of the property, having that cover area and converting to a living space with a barretile roof matching the same aesthetic of the stock of the existing house and creating a new living room slash dining room to the residents. That is the main modification in the front facade. It was requested by the Board of Architects, the replacement of the front door, instead of having the glass front door replaced with a solid wood front door, matching the aesthetic of the Revival style. In the backyard, this is the original picture of the house. And at the back yard, we are, that is the elevation, I'm sorry. And as you can see in the proposed facade at the rear side, that is the back yard, We are proposing to rebuild the existing carport and keep it as a carport, as an original was designed in the house, and putting a pergola next to it, because the intention from the client originally was using the carport as a gazebo. Well, we suggest to keep the original carport in the property and add in another... an accessory structure next to it, which is the gazebo, that it's going to be a pergola. It's going to be an open trellis. It's not going to be fully roofed. This is kind of the style of the rear facade, and we're adding a pool as requested by the owner, by the new owner. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak to this? Any board members, questions of the architect?

I have a brief question. Have you looked at the staff report and all the conditions that staff is asking you to comply with? Are you okay with those, the conditions in the staff report?

Yeah. I mean, we didn't get the report. Is that what's sent to us? I'm sorry. I couldn't read it, like, completely, but I can take a look.

Well, I can read them to you.

Yeah.

Windows and door and but okay. Thank you. Take your time.

Okay.

OK. You're OK with all of those? Yeah. Yeah.

100%.

And also with the retained.

I'm sorry, Mr. Orlando.

And also to retain the coral rock. In the front.

Yeah.

Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Mr. Silver.

I appreciate the design work. I don't have an issue in closing. I mean, we are drastically changing the front facade, but we are altering a 1993 addition, so I don't have an issue in closing that. I think it's a smart move, and it keeps it as a one-story solution, which I think is smart. I would... whoever is making the motion, if you would entertain. Right now, I think you're counting on the vehicular gates as part of your pool gates, and that is not allowed by code. So you're going to have to add some fencing somewhere. So I would ask that you work with staff to establish that fencing, because I think it's going to have to go through that carport and the gazebo area, and that has to be handled well. So I would ask that that gets added to the conditions as we make a motion.

Okay, that's acceptable? Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Ms. Rolando, any questions? Ms. Eber?

Ms. Spain, anything further?

So there is a reveal. There's a setback of a couple of inches. Can you go back to the front facade? Well, maybe not. Okay. So there is a way to differentiate the addition from the original, right?

I mean, the, the, I guess this is more for staff, the main entry, and then it steps back to where in the plans it shows a dining room table.

Okay.

Yeah, Ms. Bain, I think there's a setback on that front facade.

Yeah, there is a setback of two feet from the front facade of the addition that we're proposing to enclose, yeah. There are two feet difference between both walls.

That was my only concern, but I think it's fine.

Ms. Alvarez?

I agree with Alex.

Okay, is there any other questions? Any further discussion on this with the board? If not, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this? Hearing none, we'll close that and come back to the board. Okay, board, what's your pleasure?

I'll make a motion, if that's appropriate.

Okay, we have a motion by Ms. Spain.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the design proposal for the addition alterations to the residence on the property located at 439 Majorca Avenue. and approve it with the conditions noted in the staff report with the addition of retaining the coral rock around the, I think it was the doorway. And then also to work with staff in the future on the pool enclosure, the gates and the fence and everything. And with an issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness. Second.

Okay, we have a second by Ms. Ebert.

And Ms. Payne, just clarifying that this is an additional requirement for the east side door opening was my understanding. Yeah. The coral rock. Thank you.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Would you please call the question?

Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Mr. Silva? Yes. Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Payne? Yes. Ms. Ebert? Yes. And Mr. Maxwell? Yes.

Yes. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Look forward to seeing this in person. Okay, we're going to move on here to the next case file, which is another combination. It's case file LDH 2025-014 and case file COASP 2026-015. Consideration of a local historic designation of the property at 446 Aragon Avenue, legally described as lot one, block B, I'm sorry, block eight, section 15. CORAL GAVEL SECTION B ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THERE OF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 PAGE 111 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING THE ISSUANCE OF AN ACCELERATED SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS TO THE RESIDENTS AND SITE WORK VARIANCES HAVE BEEN REQUESTED FROM ARTICLE 2 SECTION 2-101 D4 AND ARTICLE 2 SECTION 2-101D5 for the rear setback of mechanical equipment. May we have a presentation please?

The property at 446 Aragon Avenue is before you for consideration for designation as a local historic landmark. Constructed in 1924, it was permit 189. The application was filed by the owner. As per Article 8, Section 8-103 of the Coral Gables Zoning Code, criteria for designation of historic landmarks. A local historic landmark must have significant character, interest, or value as part of the historical, cultural, archaeological, aesthetic, or architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. For designation, a property must meet one of the criteria outlined in the code. 446 Aragon Avenue is eligible as a local historic landmark based on three criteria. Historic cultural significance, criteria four. It exemplifies the historical, cultural, political, economic, or social trends of the community. Architectural significance, criteria one. It portrays the environment and era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural style. And criteria two, It embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period or method of construction. 446 Aragon Avenue is in Coral Grable Section B on a 50 foot by 110 foot lot on the southeast corner of Aragon Avenue and Hernando Street. The property contains a single family residence and a detached garage, which retains their original massing style and character. Coral Gables was originally conceived as a Miami suburb and attracted investors from across the nation during the South Florida real estate boom of the 1920s. Founder George Merrick drew from the Garden City and City Beautiful movements of the 19th and early 20th century to create his vision for a fully conceived Mediterranean-inspired city. Coral Gables is recognized as one of the first modern planned communities in the United States. Coral Gables developmental history is divided into three major historical periods. Built in 1924, 446 Aragon Avenue is amongst the earliest homes in the city and exemplifies the building typology upon which Coral Gables was founded. Nationally acclaimed landscape architect Frank Button drew the first comprehensive maps of Coral Gables in 1921 and 22, one of which is on the left in this slide. Lots in Section A went on sale in November 1921, followed by Section B in December. Section B is bounded on three sides by grand thoroughfares of Granada Boulevard to the west, Lejeune Road to the east, and Coral Way to the south, and it included an array of Merrick's planned features. Larger lots lined Alhambra Circle and the Greenway Drive encircling the proposed golf course. However, the majority of Section B was platted with 50-foot lots that could be bought separately or bundled together, offering both affordable and higher-end options. Section B developed steadily in the 1920s, and in comparison to other sections, it became a well-developed single-family home area. The homes in Section B were predominantly one-story and moderately priced. Merrick strove for Coral Gables to be socially mixed garden city community, where people of various socioeconomic levels live side by side in quality homes. Modest residents of the same construction in detail to harmonize with the larger Mediterranean revival style houses were built throughout the city, and they are an important piece of Coral Gables' early history. The home at 446 Aragon Avenue is an early example of Merrick's vision for these homes. Charles and Olivia Perrin commissioned the home in 1924 as their retirement house. It was one of the earliest homes in Coral Gables and is recorded as permit 189. While original plans or other early building records for the property have not been located to date, this early photograph provides primary documentation. The architect is unknown. 446 Aragon Avenue was designed in the Mission Revival style. In the 1920s, this style was used sparsely and seemingly only for modest homes, perhaps offering a distinct look for them. The Mission Revival style was first developed in the 19th century and drew inspiration from Spanish colonial mission heritage in the southwest. The resulting Mission Revival style is characterized by silhouetted shapes that mimic old Spanish missions, with stucco facades punctuated by recessed windows and door openings, arches without moldings, and sparse ornamentation. The most distinctive features of the Mission Revival style are the curved or shaped parapet features, evoking bell towers or bell gables. Roofs are commonly flat or low pitched with clay tiles. In the 19th century, the style never became popular outside the Southwest. However, in the early 20th century, variants of the style were built in new suburbs throughout the country, of which Coral Gables was one. Merrick's initial building campaign relied heavily on Spanish precedents, and the Mission Revival style fit his vision. Although a simple version, the home at 446 Aragon Avenue celebrates this style. Listed here and discussed in the designation report are some of the character defining features of the exterior of the home. Most notably, the mission parapet, the buttressing wing walls, barrel tile accents, the chimney with the adobe-inspired stack and belfry-inspired top, grouped round vents and horizontal lines reminiscent of adobe vigas. The residence was designed as a two-bedroom home with covered in front and rear porches. There have been no additions. There are very few building permits on record for this home. Primary alterations consist of enclosing the screened porches, window type changes, and height and reduction of some of the smaller windows. The one-story house is built of masonry block units above a crawl space and is clad with adobe-inspired texture stucco. Rectangular in plan, the living space is under a flat roof with simple and mission-style parapets. The large curved parapet is a strong identifier of the mission revival style and is repeated around the home. Feral tile adorns the flat parapet copings around the house. Strategically placed above the parapets are horizontal groupings of round clay vents. The horizontal arrangement of these round features evoke the vigas of adobe structures. The windows are also typical Mission Revival style. They are single hung windows with upper sash muttons. It appears that most of the original windows are extant. At all corners of the home, winged walls gently kick and flare out, hearkening back to the buttressing at the corners of adobe structures. The front facade is dominated by two character defining features of the Mission Revival style, the curved parapet and the arched openings. The main entry to the home is through the slightly projecting eastern porch bay. Centered at the top of this bay is one of the distinctive Mission Revival parapets with an applied plaque. Access is through the central archway that is flanked by the narrower arched openings sitting on projecting sills. The east side facade has a larger arched opening, which also has a projecting sill. Arched opening supported by large square columns is a character defining feature of the Mission Revival style. On the porch, a horizontal protruding band runs across both facades at the height of the arches Springer line, thereby visually suggesting it's a capital for square columns supporting the arches. The band wraps through the arches and continues on the interior, thereby completing the illusion that it is in capital. At each corner of the porch, wing walls begin their flare just under that band and appears to be buttressing the columns. Originally screened, newspaper sales ads suggest that the porch arches were closed with the current awning window ensemble in 1983. The western bay of the front facade is slightly recessed from the entry porch. At its center is another curved Mission Revival parapet under which is a double window ensemble. Above the window is a faux arch with an applied plaque. Below the window is a masonry window box supported by masonry corbels. Aligning with the top of the faux arch at each side of the ensemble are three round vents in a horizontal line. This bay is repeated at the center of the east facade facing Hernando Street. The chimney rises north of the northeast corner of the home. The stack flares out towards the ground in a manner reminiscent of a typical adobe architectural forms. Belfries were also common in Spanish colonial missions, and their forms are common in Mission Revival style. In this home, the top of the chimney is shaped like a belfry, and its gable is capped with barrel tile. The east side facade appears to retain its original configuration and features. The sole alteration is the height reduction of a window at the south end, which likely occurred during a pre-1980s kitchen remodel. It remains a jealousy window. The sill was retained and thus the original size of the window is easily discerned. The remainder of the windows appear to be the original single hungs with top sash high profile muttons. The west side facade also remains largely intact. At the north end of the facade is a slightly projecting entry porch. Centered on the facade behind the porch is another curved Mission Revival parapet. Running across the parapet is a horizontal line of seven round vents, again reminiscent of Adobe Vegas. Below is a single window, and it's the only apparent alteration to the facade. The bathroom window was reduced in height, but retains its sill so the original size is easily discerned. The reduction seems to correspond with interior alterations that occurred in the early 1980s. It's currently an awning window. The remaining retain their original size and hold what appear to be the original single hung windows. On the rear facade, gently flaring out at the southwest and southeast corners of the home's original living space, are buttressing wing walls. Behind the living space is a projecting bay that was originally the screen back porch. A 1981 permit for the current awning windows indicate the screens were replaced by jalousy windows in the 1950s. The rear entry to the home remains through this bay. Behind the home is a detached one-car garage that is likely contemporaneous to the home. Built of masonry units and covered in stucco whose texture matches the house, it is under a flat roof with parapets. The street-facing facade has a curved parapet in the Mission Revival style matching those on the home. Barrel tile coping flanked this parapet. The side parapets are simple and unadorned. On the north facade is a masonry screen with the palm tree motif. It is not original to the structure and it likely replaced a window. A window on the rear and north side facades were reduced to accommodate the current awning windows. Like the house, the sills were left in place, and hence the original size of the windows is easily discerned. In conclusion, 446 Aragon Avenue exemplifies the Spanish-inspired building archetype upon which Coral Gables was founded, and is also significant as one of a handful of examples of the adaptation of the Mission Revival style architecture in George Merrick's planned community. Constructed in 1924, it's one of the earliest homes in the city, and it exemplifies Merrick's vision of modest homes in his socially mixed Garden City community. Hence, the property of 446 Aragon Avenue is part of a collection of quality buildings that serves as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city. It retains its architectural integrity and significantly contributes to the historic fabric of the city of Coral Gables. staff recommends approval of the local historic designation of the property at 446 aragon avenue based on its historical cultural and architectural significance great okay board questions

So this was a result of the owner applying for a historic designation?

Yes.

Very nice.

We're here today. Waving.

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

Okay. Are there no other questions here from the board we're going to ask? I think that's out of our jurisdiction. Is there anyone in the audience or on Zoom that would like to speak for or against this? Okay, hearing none, we'll come back to the board. And having no questions, I'll ask for a motion.

I'll move.

Okay, Ms. Rolando makes a motion.

I move that the board approve the local historic designation of the property at 446 Aragon Avenue based on its historic, cultural, and architectural significance as set forth in the staff report.

We have a motion. May I have a second, please? I'll second it. I have a motion. A second by Ms. Ebert. Okay. Would you please call the question?

Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Mr. Silva?

Yes.

Ms. Spain?

Yes.

Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Ebert? Yes. And Mr. Maxwell?

Yes. Motion passes unanimously. We'll now go to the second part for the COA.

Okay, so as previously described, this is a property at 446 Aragon Avenue, described as Lot 1, Block 8 of Coral Gables, Section B, according to the plat thereof, as recorded in the Plat Book 5, page 111. of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. Today we present to you, as noted, 446 Aragon as a historic significance and has been minimally modified. As requested by the applicant, we are also submitting to you guys a addition that they would like to do And also a variance request. So the addition is composed of just a detached connection to the detached garage to the original property at the rear end. It will be partially seen at Hernando Street and basically take over on the southwest side of the rear lot. The request for the variance that we would want you to see is basically a request for the mechanical equipment. The requirement from zoning is 10 feet of rear setback, and currently they're proposing a four feet, six inches.

Okay, is there a presentation by the architect or the owner? Please state your name for the record, please.

In addition, I do want to add that the property owner is going to be pursuing the Coral Gables Cottage designation. So that's where we are limited to the one-story condition. So their footprint's a little bit bigger than you would usually allow with zoning requirements. And that is where the request for the... HVAC equipment came from so that they can spread out a little bit without having to go up, which was a big...

So there's no variance for lot coverage based on the cottage requirements. Cool.

That was my question.

It's working in this one. Isn't that interesting that it actually works?

Please introduce yourself. Good afternoon. My name is Raul Cruz. I'm an architect with Nomar Architectural Studio, and I'm representing the owner for 446 Aragon Avenue.

Can we see the plans on the screen?

Oh, I got them. Thank you. Yeah, I did.

I was.

The property is a one-story residence built in 1929, located at the corner of Aragon Avenue and Hernando Street. Our proposal is intended to preserve and rehabilitate the historic home while adapting it to the owner's family and contemporary needs. The project includes renovation of the existing residence and a 616 square foot one-story addition connecting the main house to the original detached home. original detached garage, sorry. The addition is located between the two existing structures. Its flat roof and intermediate height create a transition between the residence and the garage, allowing the original massing and historic character of the home to remain dominant. We are preserving the home's defining exterior features, including the original texture stucco, decorative details, and planters. We will continue coordinating with historic resources staff on the final windows, doors, porch treatment, stucco roofing, and other details to ensure the compatibility with the historic photographs. We also request approval of the rear setback variance for the mechanical equipment in the proposed location behind a wind wall and a gate next to the existing garage. It's the least visible option due to the corner lock configuration. We respectfully request approval of the COA and the associated variance, subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Thank you, and I will be happy to answer any questions.

All right, thank you. Board, Ms. Alvarez.

I agree with the staff report and the addition. I just had a question. Some of these garages were often built out of wood frame. Have you looked at that?

We have at the roof is a wood frame, but not the walls. Not the walls? No.

Oh, that's good. That usually creates some additional challenge.

For sure.

Ms. Bain, do you have any comments?

No, I think that this will change the livability of this house. It's very efficient plans. It's very nice.

Mr. Silva?

Yeah, I echo my colleague's sentiments. I think it's a great project, and I appreciate the effort that's gone through and kind of maintaining the cottage and the single story. I did want to speak on the variances. So, just to clarify the rear variance, right? We're asking to reduce the clearance from the property line to the mechanical equipment to 4 foot 6, right? And that's based on a 10 foot rear setback. I did want to point out that if this equipment was on the side. and they had room for it, that would allow a five-foot setback. So really all we're looking at is a six-inch difference. I understand since it's on the rear, but just so we all keep that in mind. It's not a five-foot. I mean, it technically is a five-foot, but in practicality, it's less. I did have a question on the way that the cottage setback variance is being applied, right? I don't want them to run into a problem later on with zoning and have to come back, as we've seen sort of recently. Because has zoning looked at this at all? Yes. Because the way that the thing that the code reads specifically says that you can exceed this. You can waive the side setback right up to the line of the existing house and no less than two foot six. Right. So you're in compliance with two foot six. But since the property line skews. you're closer to the property line at the addition than the other condition. I want to make sure that we don't need a variance for that. And that zoning has vetted that already.

But we're also aligning the addition to the existing wall. I understand. I understand.

And I'm in favor of this. I just want to make sure that you don't have a problem later on, right?

So even if we... So we only noticed for the ones that we identified with zoning. Zoning did have initial comments at first because, of course, the building hasn't been designated and hadn't been designated Coral Gables Cottage. So there was a... plethora of zoning comments because as a non-designated building, it would not meet any of the zoning setback requirements, ground coverage, anything like that. So we went through and they met with zoning. So this is where we ended up. is there a chance that maybe between the permitting process, they did already get a first round of comments. So we'll make sure, but we wanted to move this forward because we had kind of been going around circles for a little bit and they were eager to get started and get the permit drawings in and all of that. So, We appreciate it, but we can't even add zoning variance today if it hasn't been noticed.

Understood. And I'm not sure it would be a variance. It's a matter of interpretation of the zoning code. Right, exactly. But I want to go on record and say I would be in favor of this interpretation as it stands now, right?

That aligning the building. Stephanie is all ears. As the department tasked with interpreting the zoning code, I hear your comments. They're noted. Thank you.

Do you have any objection to the conditions noted in the staff report?

No, I don't. Okay, so the owner has accepted those? Yes.

Okay. Ms. Rolando, anything else?

Ms. Ebert, any comments from you? I'd like to make a comment. I think this is an exceptional adaptation, so I really commend you. You've put forth not only really good energy on it, but you've maintained a building that's hard to maintain. So thank you very much. Okay, so we've gone through everything.

If I could add one thing, we do learn a lot from Elizabeth's reports and presentations. She did mention that the palm motif was something that was added later on. So it was a condition to maintain it. If you all want to work with staff on that, now that we know it's not original within that report, we could remove that as a condition.

Well, it would be great if we can remove that because it would be hard to integrate right now. Yeah.

There was a palm motif that's like a concrete screen in the garage that exists on the north elevation.

It looked very 50s.

Yeah, but you know, you see them sometimes and they're never designed... special anymore so we've been kind of holding on to them a little bit more than usual I guess and since it's going to be visible it was number 10 condition number 10 was to retain yeah but Elizabeth did mention in the report that it was something that was added later on so we don't need to maintain it if it's not original and if you know we could work they want to work with it for another location we could figure that out but I don't want to hold it to them if it's not original hold them to it sorry

okay great any other questions staff of staff or okay is there anyone in the audience which is to speak for or against this or is there anyone on zoom okay we have none so we'll close that and close the public hearing and come back to the board okay board do we have a a motion i'll make a motion okay miss spain

I'd like to make a motion to approve with the conditions noted in the staff report other than condition number 10, which you can work with staff with. But I'm not including it. The design proposal for the addition and alterations to the residence and site work on the property located at 446 Aragon Avenue, a local historic landmark as of today, and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness. And should I do the variance also? Go ahead. Approve a variance to allow the mechanical equipment to maintain a rear setback of 4'6", versus the required minimum rear setback in a single-family residential district shall be 10 feet, pursuant to Article 2, Section 2-101D4 and Article 2, Section 2-101D5 of the Coral Gable Zoning Code.

Thank you.

Okay, we have a motion. I have a second, please.

I'll second. Ms. Alvarez seconded.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Please call the question.

Mr. Silva? Yes. Ms. Rolando?

Yes.

Ms. Ebert? Yes. Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Ms. Spain? Yes. Mr. Maxwell?

Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to the second special certificates of appropriateness section. And we're going to move item number two, which is case file COA SB 2026-016 to number one, if that's okay. Okay. And then the rest will follow in order.

Good afternoon and apprentice preservation officer. If we could please have the presentation up please. And just just to notify you all the applicant could not be here today. We did give I did speak with them and they're on zoom. So Callum give the architect is going to be presenting on digitally. But I'll begin with a brief introduction. This is an application for 4400 Palmarito Street, a contributing resource within the Italian Village Historic District. This property was designed in 1926 by distinguished architect A.L. Klingbeil, and the property was designated a contributing resource within the Italian Village Historic District on November 17, 1992. The applicant is requesting design approval for demolition work, additions and alterations to the residence and site work. In addition, there are variances have also been requested from Article 2, Section 2-101D4B for the side setback of the garage addition and from Article 2, Section 2-101D4C for the rear setback of the two-story garage addition and the one-story covered terrace. The addition proposed is mostly Located within the rear property at the detached garage at this property there was a some back and forth about where exactly a good location for an addition would be since it is a prominent structure on the street and has a very large side yard. It was the architect's intention to bring a two-story addition to the rear using the detached garage as the best location to create a significant modification that wouldn't really alter the character of the historic district and the original Pomerito structure. The side setback and the rear setback conditions are requests for the variances to allow for those setbacks to match the existing setbacks of the original garage. The two-story portion will have a... Let me just go back. I believe it's five feet from the rear yard rather than the 10 feet that's required. And again, for the side setback, it was the same. Sorry, the two rear setbacks was for a 10 feet requirement and requesting a five foot setback. Again, staff worked with the applicant closely. We do understand that there is a major modification and significant demolition work that's being done to that rear structure. The building is minimally visible from the street. It didn't have much character from the site visit that I completed. And the one-story portion of the garage is actually being maintained so that that line of sight from the street is remaining the same from the driveway. I'll go ahead and let Callum present. He is on Zoom and will need to be sworn in. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions noted below. Some of these conditions have already been addressed within his presentation, so he'll go through that as well.

Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give today will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you.

Good day. Apologies for not being able to be in attendance to this meeting. I really thank you for giving me the opportunity to present by Zoom. We were scheduled for last month.

Could you turn your volume down a little, please? Sure. Thank you.

It would be from CGTV. If you could turn the volume down in the room, please. Callum, your volume should be fine. It would be on our end. Thank you.

Okay. Give it a go, Callum.

Okay. Is that better?

Yes, thank you.

Okay. Just again, we were scheduled for last month and juices and processing, we got put to this month and unfortunately, I was already scheduled for a trip out of town. But going to the project, I need to share my screen to show you the drawings. Let's see if we can get that a little bigger. There we go.

We've got them up. You have? Oh, fantastic.

So I'm just going to run through the drawings. This is sort of the cover sheet just showing the two-story addition to the rear of the property. Obviously, the house is part of the wonderful Italian village district, which for me has always been that part of the Gables where the setbacks in the front were usually smaller than in other areas, creating these lovely walled street appearances. The other benefit of this obviously means you get a lot of courtyard feeling within the district. Pardon me. The house is on a fairly large, wide lot, and there's been a pool added, which takes up the whole side yard, as you can see from the survey. Existing site plan, just a little diagrammatic. In the rear, the one-story cottage, which is attached to the existing garage, is the area where our addition will sit. Here are some photographs of the property. Along the front, you can see that that house creates very much a continuous facade with an extended wall to one side, culminating in an arch, a sort of bougainvillea arch, which leads to the garage in the rear. Let's see. So this is our proposed site plan. The idea being to take down the one-story guest house in the rear and replace it with a two-story addition. Because it then becomes an addition, we have to attach it to the main house in some manner. And we thought the best way to do that would be through a breezeway with a minimal impact on the main structure. Some diagrams, so these are the two comparing floor plans and you can see that the breezeway connection, which leads conveniently from the. The kitchen breakfast area across to the to the new ground floor and then into the through into the garage undercover. Second floor, again, existing house. There is a small open porch on the second floor of the existing house, which is in the area where the roofed breezeway will connect to the house, and we can address that later. This is the main ground floor, and the idea is to expand the living area with some sort of a home gym, a game room, which could be used for guest bedrooms, and then upstairs, two additional bedrooms and a home study. This is the front elevation. The house has had some renovations, but the idea of this drawing is to show the little outline of the addition in the rear and how the existing house really is keeping its presence on the street. Again, this is the side, so this is looking from the pool towards the house. You can see the breezeway connection and the amassing of the two-story addition. This is from the south side looking across. You see the three windows are sort of in the original house. As you sort of move back into the property, you can see the garage, the two-story addition, and the existing porch that overlooks the courtyard. There's a rear elevation of the house showing the connection. And this is the new rear of the property. On the bottom is the existing one-story garage and guest house. And then above is the new two-story addition. There's a little section that shows how the breezeway really forms a little connection piece that sort of creates a lovely courtyard between two open porches overlooking in the addition in the same manner that the original house has a porch overlooking this courtyard. I'm going to just show you some renderings here just to show the impact really from the street by locating the addition in the rear. We felt like they sort of isolated that home as a complete structure and kept it sort of as original as possible with a minimal impact on that structure. And then in the bottom right, you can see this sort of creation of this courtyard, which sort of is developed between the existing house and the new structure. One of the conditions in the report was a discussion about how the roof of the breezeway attaches to the existing house. I did a little detail here just showing that the end of that roof, we can create a gable which would sort of act as a termination for the roof tile and the termination behind the wood railing of the house. I have some pictures also of that porch I wanted to show you. The wood, they disappeared. Let's try again. Okay, so we got two little porch details here. I think what they show is that the main wooden structure is actually the beam that runs across the top of the porch and that the vertical elements are really just cladding to the masonry. You can see that I don't think there's an embedded wooden column in that corner. I really feel it's sort of an implied wooden column. So that way when we attach to it, I don't think we're gonna affect anything structural in that area. And we can adapt that as staff seems you know, we deem it most appropriate. So with that in mind, I'll go back to the renderings. And I feel that, you know, like I say, the goal of this was to expand the property, the living quarters, but maintain the original houses intact as possible. And if you have any questions, obviously, I've seen the comments. They all seem very reasonable. And hopefully, we'll come to an agreement on how best that detail between the addition and the main house is resolved.

Okay. Thank you. Colin, that's really, that's very lovely. Thank you. Okay. Board, questions of the architect and the presentation?

I had a question. The only variance request is about the flat roof?

No, the existing garage is close on the south property line. It's closer than five feet. And so when we add to that, we're maintaining that side setback. So that's one variance. The second variance is the location of the addition at five feet from the rear property line, whereas a 10 would be a requirement.

I believe there's three variances requested. Clarify this.

The third one, which is an odd one, is that if you see the one-story porch, which is attached to the two-story, that has its own variance because it's one-story. It also has a variance of being closer than 10 feet to the rear. I believe it's like eight feet.

No, I think it's a good.

Mr. Silva.

Go ahead, go ahead.

Oh, I'm sorry, Ms. Alvarez, go ahead.

No, I just had a question before we begin the discussion. For Calum, were you proposing to do the kind of the wall to receive that gable at the second floor balcony?

I thought, yes, I thought rather than having the tip, you know, if you if you didn't do what I thought I'd do is raise a concrete curb or a gable at that point so that when you're looking through the railing, you don't actually see the overlapping tile. You would just see the true concrete gable and then the tile would abut. behind that gable, so you wouldn't have the issue of having to cut clay tile and have it in contact with the railing. There would be a cleaner break between the two.

Okay, so there's a clean wall in front and it follows, it's a gable or is it?

Yes, it would be a triangular in profile. So it sort of cuts into the, if you were on the porch looking out, you would look through the railings and see the backside of that concrete gable.

Okay, and you're confident you can save those rails?

Yes, the rails are not original. They're set on the center of the beam above, so they're sort of inboard maybe four inches into the porch, so they would not be in contact with a concrete element that was set flush with the concrete wall.

Thank you.

Sorry, my images are disappearing as I zoom in. But on the porch railing detail, you can see that the railing is set back. And they're not actually turned railings as you would expect an original. They almost feel like they've been cut out of a flat piece. So they feel that they were probably replaced during their lifetime.

All right.

Ms. Alvarez, any questions?

No, I want to say I support the proposal and I agree with the staff recommendation and the variances.

Ms. Payne?

I'm good with it.

Ms. Everett? Ms. Rolando? Mr. Silva?

I, in speaking about the variance, I think the addition and the way it's being handled and set to the rear is great. I think the massing works well, and you're creating another one of these courtyards you talk about right in the district. I'm a little bit concerned that one of the justifications we're using to justify the variance is to save historic fabric. And then we're tearing down a big chunk of that existing building. I think that by keeping the garage, that sort of mitigates it a little bit. And at that point, it makes sense to sort of hold that line. So I am in favor, but to me it's not cut and dry. I am in favor, though. I believe that the variance is justified.

Thank you.

Any further questions of the board? Any further questions of Mr. Gibb? Okay. All right. Thank you. We're going to Now open it up to the audience. Is there any person that wishes to speak for or against this item? Is there anyone on Zoom? Other than Mr. Callum? No. Okay. Well, then we're going to close the board hearing and move back here to the board. Okay. Discussion board?

I'll make the motion.

Okay. Motion by Ms. Rolando. Okay.

move for approval with the conditions noted in the staff report the design proposal for the additions and alterations to the residents and to the site work on the property located at 4400 Pomerito a contributing resource or structure in the Italian Village Historic District, and for approval of the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness, again, with the conditions noted.

Okay, we'll take each one of the... Yeah, I think I prefer to take the variances.

Very good.

Okay, so we're going to take the first motion, please, of four. Okay, so I've got a motion on the table. Do I have a second?

I'll second it.

Okay, Ms. Spain. Would you please call the roll?

Mr. Silva?

Yes.

Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Ms. Ebert?

Yes.

Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Spain? Yes. And Mr. Maxwell?

Yes, motion passes. Okay, second motion to approve.

I move that we approve a variance to allow the garage to have a south setback of 3 feet 6 inches versus the required minimum of 5 feet pursuant to Article 2, Section 2-1001D4 of the Coral Gables Zoning Code.

Okay. We have a motion and a second. We have a motion. I need a second, please.

I'll second it with a revision that it's section 2-101.

Thank you for the clarification. It's only 1-0. Yeah. We've got an extra zero snuck in there. Okay. Would you call the roll, please?

Okay. Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Mr. Silva? Yes. Ms. Ebert? Yes. Ms. Rolando? Yes. Ms. Spain? Yes. Mr. Maxwell?

Yes. Motion carries. Okay. Next question.

A motion for the board to approve a variance to allow a new two-story addition have a rear setback of five feet versus the required minimum setback in a single-family residential district of ten feet pursuant to article 2 section 2-101 the 4c the Coral Gables zoning code

Okay, have a motion. I'll second it. Second? Ms. Alvarez, Ms. Bain? I'll second it, yes. Okay, thank you. Please call the roll.

Ms. Alvarez. Yes. Mr. Silva. Yes. Ms. Ebert. Ms. Rolando. Yes. Ms. Bain. Yes. And Mr. Maxwell.

Yes, motion carries. Okay, and for the final.

Okay, the final motion to approve a variance to allow a new one-story building covered terrace addition to have a rear setback of five feet versus the required minimum rear setback in a single family residential district of 10 feet, if compatible with the neighborhood character. The Historic Preservation Board, as applicable, may allow for a setback of five feet PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 2, SECTION 2-101D4C OF THE CORAL GABLES ZONING.

OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION. SECOND, PLEASE.

I'LL SECOND IT.

OKAY. MS. SPAIN, YOU'RE ON A ROLL.

A QUESTION FOR MS. ROCKBORN. WHY IS THIS VARIANCE IF THE ZONING CODE ALLOWS IT ALREADY?

I THINK IT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD.

Okay. Thank you for the clarification.

There has to be a finding that it's compatible with the neighborhood. There has to be a finding made.

Do we need to have a finding that it's compatible?

I think your motion says that it is compatible. That's how I interpreted your motion.

Okay.

Thank you.

I agree with that interpretation.

Thank you.

As do I.

Thank you. Thank you for all the agreements. Would you please call the roll?

Ms. Ebert? Yes. Mr. Silva? Yes. Ms. Alvarez? Yes. Ms. Spain? Yes. Ms. Rolando? Yes. Mr. Maxwell?

Yes. Motion carries. Okay. All approved. Okay. We're going on to the next item, please, which is case closed. Thank you. Thank you very much, Callum. Okay, do we need to take a break for anybody? Just a quick one? Okay. We're going to take a quick restroom break.

We need Ms. Salvares. Yes to a break.

Yes to a break. Yes, I think we all need one at this time. Okay, we'll come back and call it 10 minutes. Is that okay? Thank you.

Recording stopped.

Allow, but we have 5 and she's coming in right now. So we're going to go ahead and keep everything moving here a little bit so that we can get everybody out of here. And on their way. Okay, whenever you're ready, we'll start the recording back in process.

Okay, wonderful.

We're back in session. Thank you all for your patience. Okay, we're going to go to previous item number one, which was relocated to number two, where this is going to be case file COA SP 2025-19, an application for the issuance of a special certificate appropriateness for the property at 547 Alcazar Avenue, a contributing resource within the Alcazar Historic District, legally described as Lot 24, Block 13, Coral Gables, Section B, Plattebook 5, Page 111, Miami-Dade County. The application requests design approval for the enclosure of an open front porch with impact-resistant windows and doors.

Good afternoon. This is an application as mentioned for 547 Alcazar Avenue. This property was before the board on September 18 2025. And the Historic Preservation Board reviews an application to install windows with the wood grain finish and glass selection of gray. After a thorough discussion and two failed motions, the item was continued on March 19 and updated submittal responding to staff's recommendations was received. The applicant is requesting design approval for the enclosure of the front porch with impact resistant windows with black frames and clear glass. This request was before you all in April and again was continued because of two failed motions or maybe one failed motion. At this time, the property owners are here. There was some discussion about if the conditions that were set in the first report were met. And I just want to clarify today that the conditions that staff had included if the proposal was going to be considered were all addressed. So there were some items within that report that they did comply with and include in their new proposal. which included to consider dividing the window openings where the top of the original porch railing was located, clarify the frame color to be used, clarify the interior railings at the east and west doors, or considered fixed windows. No alterations are to be made to the existing original front steps and wing walls. Window and door muntins were to be high profile, dimensional, and the window glass to be clear, no reflective, no tint, and no low E.

Anna, just a quick question here. Yes. The COA that we have here or that I'm looking at is from April.

Oh, sorry. There was no update to the COA because the modifications said there's been no change since that March proposal. At the April meeting, we were hoping they requested a continuance because we didn't have a full board.

Right.

And in the months past since then, we still haven't had a full board, but it's been – three months now, and the applicants are ready to move forward. They're here today. Oops, sorry. Right.

Okay, but before they come up, I have a question here. Based on what you just said, has staff changed its recommendation?

So our recommendation remains the same. We're pretty consistent about not wanting to enclose original front porches. And yes, they can be considered on a case-by-case basis. I think we had very clear requirements of if they are considered that these would be the ideal situation. In this case, even more so because they are retaining the original front wall of the building. Most people would be doing this in order to blow out that wall and make a bigger living room, family room, DINING ROOM. SO THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AT THE LAST BOARD ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT BECOMES AN INTERIOR WALL, AN EXTERIOR WALL, NOW THAT THE PORCH WAS BEING ENCLOSED. WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANTS, AND THEY WERE GOING TO, I BELIEVE, IF YOU WANT ME TO, OKAY. They were going to proffer, and we got clarification from the city attorney, that we could do a covenant so that that original front wall can be retained as part of the historic designation and reviewed for further modifications in the future. So that covenant can run with the property, and then we'll flag it in our permit system and our files. so that any modifications for future owners, maybe not them, that try to modify that wall would have to come through our process. But their intention is to maintain the wall, the existing casement windows within it, and the front door.

Another question. So in your review, from last time to this time, has the design changed? Because it appears to be that it's, you know,

Yeah, I was just going to try to get to the, maybe that was the better ending. Yeah, so the design now is more in keeping with a screened-in porch condition rather than a casement window condition. So it is a more simplified design. Let me go to the elevation so that's better to read the line drawing. And their intention, too, was to have operable windows at the top half, right? and fixed below so that they're still able to have an open air space if the weather fits.

Okay. Are we going to have a new presentation or are we just going to have a discussion?

It might be good to hear from them directly, just for the record. And then we're here to answer any questions that you might have.

Okay. Sorry. If I may, just to be clear, the document, the most recent document and the one we should be looking at is the one that's labeled 547 Alcazar permitting 031926, right? And the revised renderings, right? We're not looking at the old.

Right. The old was because it's all in the same case. So that's the revised is the ones from April. Is that the date on it? Yeah.

And this is the newest.

March 19th. Sorry, apologies. But that's the proposal we're looking at.

That's the proposal. And that's the proposal that responds to the comments from the September report. Okay. Thanks.

Okay. Okay. Property owners, please reintroduce yourself again. It's good to see you.

Hi, my name is Karina Lorenzen. I have not been sworn in, so I don't know if that has to happen before we start. I apologize. There you go.

Yes, please. Both of you, if you're going to testify, can please be sworn in. I was here. Sorry. Okay. Thank you. Sorry, I can't see with this thing here.

Yes.

Hi, my name is Javier Diaz. I'm the other property owner.

So as mentioned by our very nice introduction here, this is not our first time here. We are hoping to creates a more usable space within our home that still preserves the aesthetic that we absolutely love. We chose an old Spanish home. I grew up in historic Coral Gables on Navarre. We wanted to be here our entire, hopefully most of our lives. I've only known him 12 years, but this has been our dream for the space since we bought the house. This allows for us to have a more usable space regarding any weather conditions. It is also something that's removable if anyone in the future decides that they prefer the screened-in aesthetic that is currently there, although we hope to be at this property for some time. We've taken all of the advice and recommendations at multiple meetings, as long as meetings with staff, and we've tried to integrate them to the best of our abilities. As mentioned, the glass matches the rest of the home. The frames are black wood grain. There are operable casement windows that should hopefully be beautiful if we ever have the chance to see them with a fixed structured bottom to allow for safety. We have a very rambunctious, wonderful, almost three-year-old who will forever be two, but I want him to be safely able to play at that area if possible. And that was definitely taken into account as well. I really think that the excuse me. The one of the main points and I know that Anna mentioned this as well, we have a existing interior wall at the porch currently that has the original windows to our home with beautiful cranks. They have become heavily warped and heavily disturbed over time that has a lot of air leak. It is an element of the home that we really like though and we'd like to preserve. And this would allow us to both preserve the integrity of a porch while having a more usable space, maintain that windowed area to be able to allow us to functionally keep it in our home. Our interior of our home is maintained in an old Spanish style. We did not buy the house and scrub all the walls and make them smooth. The stucco is there. I chose that for a reason. I love this. Um, and I hope that you see that we're not trying to, you know, change anything. I also we're both willing to sign whatever is necessary with the city attorney's help to maintain that wall as is I apologize for not knowing the correct vernacular is not my area. Anything that you have to add? We're open to any questions, suggestions, etc. I know that we've already presented to you before. I hope that you'll allow for some reconsideration. Thank you for your time.

thank you and I apologize that you have to be here so many times I do have a question for you and hopefully it'll help everyone cleared up have you seen a picture or anything like that of the early home showing the screen pattern or has you worked with staff on that just so that sort of documented yes we do have the 1940s photo for and from our files it's hard to read because there were awnings

the property but there was one from I think the 70s yeah so we were going off that top right 1980 sorry okay I can see that Yeah, and in order to make them operable was why that horizontal, I mean, sorry, the vertical in the center was added so that they could have a casement condition on the top half.

Like a third of the way up crossbar.

Right. Yes, and that would meet the requirement for the 36-inch railing height.

And so the windows pretty much match what that looks like, as best as you can tell.

That was the best, as best as they can.

Okay, thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. Board let's have some questions and discussion or so that we can move forward Miss Spain If you'll turn that on a question and a comment Are you aware that you need five out of the six of us here to vote?

I just want to make sure Okay and also if this was coming to us on not designated, and someone had done this exact thing. And so we were looking at it for a designation with glass in that opening. We could easily designate it as historic, saying that it does not impact the historic integrity the house we've done that before I just thought I'd bring that up because it is removable and in the past not that not we go by what we do on the cast it's not on a case-by-case but if this came to us prior to being designated I believe that we would designate this home even if it had the glass in those openings so that's my comment

Thank you. That's a good comment. Ms. Alvarez, do you have anything that you wish to add or ask a question?

I'm going through the files, but I'm looking for a proper plan that shows the attachment. I'm sorry if I missed it. I'm trying to open up because it's a bunch of individual.

Did we get the PowerPoint back up?

Oh, this is permitting.

Did you want a complete floor plan? I don't think there is a complete floor plan because they weren't making any changes to the rest of the building.

Here's a floor plan. I just think this is so much about how it attaches, right? Because you have the special columns on the front. Those columns.

So that has to attach.

Oh, I think I know what you're referring to.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you asking if the front structure will at all be inhibited by the installation of the windows? Because I do know the answer to that.

So I think, Anna, if you look at the photo here to the top left, the columns are actually set on top of their concrete wall. So you could even see the surround, the yellow behind the column. So they should be able to attach in that same plane so it wouldn't damage any of those decorative elements.

We had also been hopefully assured that that's the case.

And then any reinforcement, right? Because that's probably what's going to be necessary for that would have to happen behind that column anyways. So you might have to build out some of the wall some, but it'll be on the interior side.

I just feel like that's an important consideration that should have been part of the package.

I will say that with the column, that column doesn't protrude in the back. It is a very, it's flat on the back. It is concrete. You will be able to nail in the windows for the frames.

We've been assured by that by both the window company and the installers.

So we can add that. Again, if this is considered today, there could be a specific detail requested for the construction documents to ensure that that is included and that those elements are protected during construction, if considered.

Mr. Silva?

Yes, thank you for working with staff. I appreciate that. We did have some concerns previously when we were discussing this, and I'm glad you heard them. The doors on the ends are gone. The pattern is more appropriate. As to Anna's concern, can you go back to the actual photo, not the rendering? I believe that those columns are, as Ms. Prentice was saying, kind of in front, so there shouldn't be an issue. I think you're going to be attaching to concrete direct, flat concrete, right?

Yeah.

Yes. If you go back to that one. There you go. Right. You can kind of see it here clearly in the blow-up. And if you go to the package and you zoom in. Here as well. Yeah. So you're going to be attaching to concrete. And if any reinforcement is necessary, you come inboard, right? Don't go outboard. But that's a typical thing, right? That you would work your permit drawings through with staff. So I am in favor of this as it currently stands. So, yeah, thank you.

Ms. Rolando, any questions, comments?

I like the reconfiguration. I think it's projecting the, preserving the legacy, at least, of the screened-in porch. And thank you for working with staff on it.

Thank you, Ms. Rolando. Ms. Everett.

Since I joined this board about a year ago, so many of the houses that come to us are in the North Gables, and they're the small houses that need more space to make them more livable by today's standards. In fact, the house that we just designated at 446 Aragon had a front porch. and and and the two on each side that had were glassed in and we just designated it and as I said when this first came to us as a young family we did much the same thing in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania it was a 1920s stone house that the the porch was screened in and then we glassed it in as our family grew we needed the additional space and I can tell that that you are very sincere about loving this house. So I'm saying the same thing I said before. I'm very much in favor.

Well, thank you, Ms. Herbert. Okay. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item, or is there anyone on Zoom? There's no one on Zoom. Is there anyone in the audience? No? Okay. So we're going to come back to the board for a motion. I'd like to have a motion, please.

I'll make one if I can get to the staff report.

I'm in the same issue.

Mr. Silva's trying to get there, too.

You want me to take a go at it?

If you wish, Ms. Rolando.

Happy for you, too. I move that the board approve.

I'm sorry, Ms. Rolando. Could you speak it to your microphone a little bit closer? The Zoom is having trouble.

OK, sorry. I move that the board approve the A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE WINDOWS AS DEPICTED, THE WINDOWS FOR 547 ALCOSAR AVENUE AS DEPICTED ON THE DRAWING WITHIN THE MATERIALS DATED MARCH 11, 2026.

Are you going to include the conditions and the staff before? Yes.

So my understanding is that the proposal that you are approving the March plans already comply with all of those conditions. But Anna, perhaps you can confirm that those conditions aren't needed because they're met in those March plans.

Yes, those were already met, the six that are listed within the report. But if you wanted to include the one of, you know, just to ensure that we're protecting the exterior columns, we can add that now. Oh, the back wall. Oh, so that's, again, up to you all. If you want to require that covenant, it's something that they would proffer before you all to be able to include the protection of that front wall, well, original front wall.

whatever the will of the board is. Right.

I'm not quite sure how to phrase that.

So Mr. Rolando, if I understand your motion so far, it's to approve the plans presented today, the March plans and approve the certificate of appropriateness. Um, if you want to add a condition about the covenant, it would be to accept their proffer of a covenant to be worked out with the city attorney's office to, um, retain jurisdiction over that wall by the Historic Preservation Board going forward. And we can work on the exact language, but my understanding is that's the gist of the proffer.

OK. So the motion would have two parts. First, a certificate of appropriateness for the plans as submitted with the configuration and size. of the windows depicted on the March 11th. And the second half would be that there be recorded by the homeowner a covenant running with the land that would recognize and protect the original front wall of the residence and allow the city and historic preservation board to retain jurisdiction over it in the event there's any modification in the future.

Understood. Thank you. And just to be clear, was there an additional condition regarding the interior build-out if needed? The interior wall of the No.

It will be reviewed at staff level either way.

Perfect.

I understand your motion. I don't think we need to get that granular.

Understood. I understand your motion. Okay.

I'd like to second if I can. Question?

Okay, we have a question.

Sorry, but you say the six have been complied with, but number five is the muntins are to be high profile, and number six is no reflectivity, no tint, no low E. I think that should be included. Okay. Okay.

Ms. Rolando, do you want to include those? I would accept that amendment.

I don't know whether I'm able to make an amendment.

You are. There's discussion after the second. Well, we need a second on the motion as amended.

A second on the motion as amended.

Okay, Ms. Evers. Okay. We have an amended, amended motion.

Would you like me to restate the motion, Mr. Maxwell, briefly? Okay.

I think everybody's pretty good.

You're all going to give the homeowners a heart attack.

I think we all have it.

Approved with two conditions and the covenant.

Yes. And it's in one motion. Yes. Understood. So if we call the question, please.

Ms. Alvarez. Yes. Mr. Silva. Yes. Ms. Spain. Yes. Ms. Rolando. Yes. Ms. Ebert. Yes. Mr. Maxwell. Yes.

Absolutely. Third time's the charm. Thank you for your perseverance.

All right. You guys are good. Thank you. We'll work on the rest with them.

Perseverance and the pace of preservation. Yeah.

I think they move faster in Italy. Okay, we're going to move on now to case file COA SP 2026-004. This is an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 118 Florida Avenue, a contributing resource to the McFarland Homestead Subdivision Historic District, legally described as Lot 20, Block 1A, McFarland Homestead. by the Platte Book 5, page 81, Miami-Dade Records. The application requests design approval for an addition and alterations to the residence and site work. Variances have also been requested from Article 10, Section 10-1010, Number 4A, and Article 5, Section 5301 of the Coral Gables Zoning Code for the elimination of the required off-street parking and to permit wood construction.

Thank you. Can I have the PowerPoint back up, please? It's a location map of the property in question. It's in the McFarland District, just north of Grand Avenue. And this is a probably 1980s photo, if I'm not mistaken. So the historic district, McFarland Homestead subdivision historic district was first designated by the city of Coral Gables in September of 1989. In May of 1994, the district was listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and it remains our only district on the National Register. Wood frame single family residence at 118 Florida was built circa 1930, and it's an important example of an intact early bungalow in this historic district. The application is requesting sign approval for an addition to the rear of the property of approximately 620 square feet, alterations to the residence and minimal site work. There are two variances that have been requested from the zoning code. The first is to allow the residents to not provide a carport or portico share. The majority of these residences in the district do not provide covered off-street parking as required by the code, and there is no evidence that a garage or carport ever existed on this property. We feel that the addition of such a feature would be detrimental to the historic integrity of the structure and the district as a whole and support the granting of the variance. The second variance has to do with the granting to allowing wood frame construction, which is not currently allowed in the city of Coral Gables. Again, the existing residences in the historic district utilize wood frame construction and wood siding as part of vernacular architecture. The use of wood as a construction material is unique to this district and the only place in the city where this type of architecture and construction does exist. The use of wood as a construction material is entirely appropriate and would respect the integrity of the architecture of both the historic building and the district. Staff supports the granting of this variance as well. Board of Architects approved ultimately on July, a week ago, 2026, and we do have a bunch of staff conditions that are noted on the last page of the report. I did want to note that, one, it's not a condition, but it probably should be, that the existing residence is in need of substantial repair and restoration work, which is not noted anywhere. No notes or information were provided on the plans about what that restoration work is going to entail, the scope of that work, what that plan is. So that all needs to be incorporated into the permit set of drawings so we're abundantly clear of what exactly is happening on the historic fabric of the existing house. We have a presentation on behalf of the property owner, who was not expecting to present, so be kind. So let's move it forward for you. All right, so forward, backward.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Kaba. And unfortunately, the architect and the owner of the home couldn't be here today. I just want to say something briefly. This is the fourth such structure that this owner has purchased, as they have an interest in preserving as much of the West Grove as possible. This is a 1930s bungalow, shotgun house as some people call it. I think Kara gave you most of the points. I'll do my best to answer any other questions that you have. As she mentioned, it would be, in addition to the rear of the house, it's minimally visible from the street. We plan to preserve everything else about the facade of the home with the exception of the things that need to be replaced windows doors and that type of thing, including the railing and the porch and other things that. Have been mentioned as Kara said, we're looking for 2 variances. 1 is to be able to build the addition to the home. with wood construction. That was actually a recommendation from the Board of Architects to be consistent with the existing structure. And the other, as Kara mentioned, is to waive the requirement for having a covered off street parking structure. These are just if you have any specific questions as to what is going to be preserved from the current structure. There are still a lot of details outstanding about the interior construction and we will be working with those throughout the permit process with the staff. Please let me know if you have any questions on this slide. Happy to walk you through any of it.

I thought in the staff report that one of the conditions was maintaining the pipe railing. And is the owner accepting of all of the staff report conditions?

Absolutely. They reviewed the report, and they are in agreement with all of the conditions and recommendations. And we look forward to working through those with staff. We love that railing. It's actually kind of, instead of being this way, it's kind of tilted. It's a very interesting feature. Any other questions in regards to what's going to be retained? We already went through that. There is our cute little house. Like I said, this is a fourth structure that's very similar that we're working on. That's one side of the house. That's the rear. That's where the addition will go.

The homes that you own there, have you restored those?

Well, those are not on the historic side of the Grove. They're west of Douglas Road. But they have all been restored. We have two that are side by side that were once a duplex and then separated at some point. And then we have another freestanding one on Thomas Avenue. And they're all currently rented.

Oh, okay.

It's added quite a bit to that that part of the neighborhood. This owner also owns a 14 unit building on Grand Avenue and Plaza. So he's very much involved in in preservation of again, the West Grove, which we're losing daily. This plant beg your pardon.

I said it's gone.

I know. And they're taking our canopies, but I won't get into that right now. This gives you a very good idea of the setback, the entrance to the porch, the entrance to the main home, which only has one bedroom. The idea for the addition is to provide a better living environment with a primary bedroom, a bathroom, a closet, and a large open kitchen. And then I won't bore you since I know it's been a long afternoon, but if there's anything that you'd like me to address in my non-architecture capacity, here's the elevations. Again, please stop.

You're showing in the plans that the entirety of the building is being renovated.

Yes, sir. That's correct. As it was mentioned before, the The structure of the home needs quite a bit of repair, but it's not unlike any of the other ones that we've worked on. They were all pretty much in the same condition. These are the materials that are being proposed. I think we lost a little color on the base Color there, but it's kind of a buttery beige The trim is kind of a greenish brown those are the shingles that are proposed for the existing structure and the addition roof and then aluminum windows and whatever doors are are deemed appropriate for the home and That's just a survey that snuck in there Any questions I can answer for you or board? No. Okay, great Keep it you're keeping your existing canopy You're keeping the existing canopy of trees that I see I mean that is our number one goal to make the house more livable um but that is our number one goal is to keep the character of the home and and to the extent that it contributes to the overall McFarland homestead division. Thank you very much.

Board, questions of the presenter? Ms. Alvarez?

I don't know if she'll be able to answer. I was just curious, would it be true wood siding or hardy board? I think they're both good or not true.

You're going to need to come back up, I think, so that your responses will be on the record.

Your question was about, was it wood siding? Yes, correct.

Ms. Spain? No questions?

I have no questions.

Ms. Everett, anything?

Do we know what type of wood you're using?

What type of wood?

Wood.

I'm sorry I do not, but I can get that information for the staff.

Can I say something? I wanted you guys to, I wanted to acknowledge Mr. Prime, who is here in the audience, and I didn't know if you wanted to speak at all. I mean, I know it's not public comment yet, but.

Absolutely. Happy to have him. Okay, we need to, for public comment, hang on just a minute, we need to open this up to the.

Was he sworn in?

No, he can do public comment without being sworn in, I believe. Okay, Mr. Silva, do you have a question on this?

I'll wait for his comments.

All right, go ahead.

I do. Good afternoon, members of the board, staff. In reviewing this, I'm glad that someone's taking care of the property and it's going to make it more habitable. We'll have more residents in the neighborhood. My only concern is that I always find out about these things almost after the fact, you know, noticing of whatever. And it's almost as if Those who went before us who made that neighborhood on the National Register, they almost think as if we don't exist anymore. Yes, it's been over 40 years, but we just try to stay vigilant. So as far as I can see, this is a good project, stays within the scope of the neighborhood, and they keep that rail that's been there. for as long as I've known it there, it's been for over 60 years, so I believe that we should do well, but in the future that more care be taken to notify the homeowners association or just members of the community and let them know what's going on.

Thank you, sir.

Is the homeowners association notice on variances? They have their address within the district, right? So they should be noticed.

Any properties within the radius should be noticed.

Okay. I was just putting that on the record.

The association is not a homeowner or a property owner, so.

Tenants are generally also notified as well. It's whoever, the residence itself is notified as well as the property owner. Sometimes those are not the same mailing addresses.

Yeah, but the point is the Homeowners Association, unless they have an address in the district, don't get notice.

What that, where Redoco is, isn't that where the Homeowners Association is also?

Okay.

So they should have been

Notified appropriately Back to questions Miss Everett, what is the so the circumference circumference that's notified? I mean if this house is a Thousand thousand eighteen a thousand foot radius Wow. So in that neighborhood, that'd be a lot of homes that would be notified and Mr. Prime you didn't you how did you find out about this meeting? I

um i drive the neighborhood so i see the notices i always check the uh city um website find out which meetings are going on here there and whatever and i try to make sure that i check my mail to see if there's been any notices or anything and you did not receive i mean are you within the thousand feet do you think yes Yeah, I live at 141 Florida Avenue.

I know where you live, so I know you're in the district.

Yeah, so I don't know if it's clerical errors or anything. It's probably, you know, there are many things that are placed out there. Maybe they don't have a correct address or another idea for how they need to address it. But I would think that, especially with the efforts of what my father did, they would at least remember that, hey, the Lola B. Walker Homeowners Association was responsible for getting that historic designation.

Right, right, right.

You know, I will tell you, Mr. Prime, what I do in the neighborhood that I'm in that is not a historic district, it's nowhere near as significant as the one that you will live in, I actually walk around and drive around and look for the city signs. Because if there's, particularly in your district, there may be a house that is having alterations done that doesn't require a variance. And so then you wouldn't get a notice. Typically, all the demolitions in that neighborhood are... sent to the uh it used to be uh sent to the homeowners association are notified of that um i don't know what happens anymore i don't know whether that's a part of the code um but there would be occasions that you would not be notified and something would be happening in the area and and i'm very vigilant and like you are in yours because I just want to know what's going on. And for me, that's the easiest. I check my mail all the time and everything, but if there's a little green sign in front of a house, then I can call and find out what's going on.

And that I do. I do. make sure at least every 10 days I've gone around each one of the streets.

That would be like you. You're one of the good guys. Nice seeing you.

Okay. Board, any further questions, discussions?

Michael.

Oh, we've got, okay, just a minute. I've got to move it here and then move to open that. Anybody here have any more questions for the presenter? Okay, if not, we're going to close that part of the board and open it to the public. Okay, so we have people that would like to speak to the issue, please Have you been sworn in sir? Okay, very good, thank you, please state your name for the record

Hello, my name is Cooper. I am the neighbor from across the street of that address. So I'm 118. So looking at the porch. I had two questions. The first one is I was curious to see the floor plan again, if they were at all possible, just out of morbid curiosity.

Would you put that up, please?

Oh, yeah, there you go.

Would you put it on the board, please? I don't know that one. Oh, there you go.

Lovely. So this is the existing house. Yeah, yeah.

CGTV, could we have the presentation up, please?

Let us put the presentation up.

Or you could look at me, and I'm holding it up.

Here we go. Okay.

There you go. All right, sir. Your questions? So that was my first question. The second one is a remark or a comment that may lead into a question. I don't know if this is the right board to bring this up with, but considering the fact that many of the properties in that neighborhood are made of wood, And termite season is year-round. I did notice, and after doing a little bit of research, that the white lights on the street, so the LED, I don't know if they're LED, they might be halogen, some kind of white light, they do draw in more termites than yellow lights do. And since LED lights can be programmed to be a yellower tone, that may actually minimize the risk of drawing in termites in the neighborhood And advanced preservation efforts for the neighborhood. So something worth considering, right? This is amateur research, obviously, but worth looking into.

Well, thank you very much. I think, unfortunately, the lights are controlled by FBNL. Yeah. This board's been through that.

Did you get a notice about this meeting?

I looked across the street. I was having coffee, and I looked across the street.

Okay, but you didn't get mail notice.

No, I didn't. No, no, no. But, yeah, I was just a nosy neighbor. I got close to the property and just read the sign.

All right, cool.

Well, thank you very much. We appreciate that.

I was expecting since May today.

Okay, is there anyone else that would wish to speak for or against this? Is there anyone on Zoom?

Nope.

have no one on zoom so we're going to close the public portion of the hearing again and come back to the board for uh action okay i have a question yes ma'am um who who sends these notices um is it please my question is who sends the notices to the homes in a thousand feet radius is that is that the historic department or is that

The labels are provided by the applicant. And the city prepares the notices and they're mailed out through our mail. And just to confirm, because this property was actually on the last agenda as well. So there was notices mailed for the previous meeting when the item was deferred. And this meeting as well. So you mailed out two notices? Yes. the property is posted physically on the site obviously is what that's why i think what they were saying had mentioned so that's been up and then again the property is posted at the time of the board of architects meetings so it was also posted for boa last week or two weeks ago as well and just for the record because i mentioned before the code requires that the mailed notice be sent to the property address and as well as the mailing address on the miami-dade property appraiser should that be a different address for instance if there's an owner who's not occupying the building so it goes

to sometimes two addresses.

Really?

That's been a recent change.

Yes, that's good.

Okay, ladies and gentlemen, if there's no further discussion.

I think Mr. Prime wants to say something.

I'm sorry. Please go ahead. I'm sorry.

Just one additional thing. It may not have been clear, but... The notices for the meetings that went to more like the Board of Architects, the other parts, we don't get a lot of those. But as far as the Historic Department is concerned and Public Works, they do send them out and we do see them. But my concern is that it's not really consistent. But it does happen, and at the Historic Department, they are on top of things.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Pine. That helps. That's good to know.

I think the Board of Architects, they do not mail out notices at all. So with the Board of Architects, it's only the sign in front of the house.

Okay. Okay.

Okay, Board, we're going to have, there's going to be three motions on this, the way we have it in the report. Okay. I'd like to have a motion, please, for approve or denial. That's with number one. Do I have someone for a motion?

I'll move. Mr. Silva. Before making the motion, though, I would like to state for the record that in terms of the variances, which we haven't really discussed yet, I think they are absolutely justified and necessary in keeping with the character of the district and the character of the building. So I'm in favor. And my motion will reflect that. So I will move to approve the design proposal with the conditions noted in their staff report or the addition and alterations to the residents and site work on the property located at 118 Florida Avenue and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness as Previously described I will also incorporate in my motion approval of the variance to allow the residents to not provide a carport or port crusher and that without providing off-street parking facilities or additional off-street parking facilities i will also include a motion to approve a variance to allow wood frame construction which is a variance from article 5 section 5-301 of the coral gables zoning codes

okay so it's one motion yes with three parts does everyone understand okay I'd like a second please I'll second it okay miss Spain is seconded all right would you please call the roll miss Alvarez yes miss Rolando yes miss Ebert yes mr. Silva yes miss Spain yes mr. Maxwell

Yes, of course. Thank you. Motion approved. And so move forward. I look forward to seeing this house in gorgeous condition. Thank you. It's a great neighborhood. Thank you, Mr. Pine, for coming and sharing your information. I think it's really important. And thank you for your support.

I just wanted to say a quick thank you to Anna and her team, who are absolutely wonderful and held my hand throughout this entire thing. So thanks again.

They're a good team. Okay, we're going to move on to the last item. That is item COA SP 2026-006, an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 410 Minorca Avenue, a local historic landmark legally described as lots 10 and 11, block 4, Coral Gables section B, plat book 5, page 111, Miami-Dade County records. The application requests design approval and approval Design approval for an addition and alterations to the residence and site work. May we have the presentation please?

Yes, so today we're going to be presenting already a designated home in 2024. The 410 Menorca was permitted in March 1935 and it's one of the earliest homes built in Coral Gables during the New Deal era. It's contemporary Mediterranean transitional style. It blends in with the neighborhood and currently shows characters of that characteristics with minor changes. Today, the proposal that is being shown today is a design approval for a second story addition to the rear and one story side addition with alterations to the residence. Limited site work is also proposed. No variances are needed for this application, and I do want to have a side note, which is one of the requirements, but I do want you guys to take a look at it. Obviously, we'll know the applicants to try to maintain the current configuration of the main entrance. That's it.

Okay. Want to put the presentation up?

Oh.

Good afternoon. Please introduce yourself.

There we go.

There you go. What? Here we go. Good afternoon.

My name is George Gonzalez with Vertical Design. I'm the architect for the property, representing the homeowners, Mike Wilkie and Natalia Paulini.

George, if you would please. Thank you. Thank you.

OKAY. MY NAME IS GEORGE GONZALEZ, VERTICAL DESIGN STUDIO. I AM THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROPERTY. SO THIS IS THE EXISTING RESIDENCE. OH, WOW. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE RENDERINGS AT THE BOTTOM OR THE PERSPECTIVES AT THE BOTTOM, OUR INTENT WAS TO SET BACK THE ADDITION AND THE ALTERATIONS TO still highlight the existing portion of the residents. We're only connecting at the rear and basically going towards the rear. These are the existing photos of the residents as it sits today. Our intent is to restore as much as we can see on that original photograph, the features. For example, we're planning on removing the canopy on the other front we're planning on restoring the canopy on the right that you can see on the on the fourth photo and we have gone over the recommendations from staff and we agree with them this is a on the left side you can see what's existing on the right side you can see what's being proposed These are the elevations of the house. And some sections.

George, the early photograph from 1935 shows a screen porch.

Thank you for bringing that up. That's the one point that in the conditions, it was phrased as to consider bringing the screen porch back, but the homeowners do not want to, but we are willing to make all of the other changes.

That's pretty important. That's one of the very few chinoiserie details that you'll see in any building in Coral Gables ever. In other words, it's kind of what we used to call Chinese Chippendale.

I agree, but I have discussed this with a client, and they really would like to stay away from the screen porch.

Okay, thank you. Board?

Now it's just open, right?

There's nothing there. They've taken it all out. It's just an open mall. No, it is currently open.

The screen porch does not exist now. So in our report, we were recommending that if it was considered that we would work with them on the details.

Okay, I have an issue with staff increasing the scope of work on any... That's why it was a consideration.

Because we cannot require it.

And to Anna's point, the other thing is that even the existing facade of the entrance is being modified. So it's going from a single door to a double door when you enter. So if we look at the the renderings versus the existing condition.

We're willing to revert or do not modify that opening.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so it's going to stay the original opening.

Yes, we'll keep the original openings. We'll have the dimensional mountains, the true two-piece tile, and all of the other things that were mentioned. The only item that we would like to push back on is the screen porch. Bummer.

And again, it was just a recommendation because there was some restoration work occurring at the property that we thought that it could be something that could be worked in as part of an ad valorem application as well.

Must be $1,000 to do it. Okay, board, questions?

Okay.

I have to say I'm rather appalled by the massing. It's like the addition that ate the house. I understand the need for more space, but I don't think it's very sympathetic.

I think the massing... can appreciate what you're saying. But I think the from a street point of view, it is not as it is not going to feel as massive because we have set it back quite a bit. So a lot of care was taken into keeping the existing historical structure highlighted with everything else set back and the two story addition at the very rear. I think a good example would be the second column, second perspective.

It's overpowering.

So what happened to the requirement that they show existing and proposed on each sheet? Are we not doing that anymore? Or am I missing something? These are on there as existing and proposed.

Yeah, so...

It's in the plans. In the plans. But what about the elevations?

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not used to the microphone. No, I think in the, you're talking about the elevations. The elevations I thought were also submitted that way. So this might have been an older application. So this went to the BOA. Oh, okay.

All right, I got it.

Right, there you go.

I just hadn't gotten to that.

Okay, I get it perfect Would you like to see if there's any public comment all the board is I

Is there any consideration for screening for the one-story addition?

Screening as in landscaping?

So in other words, you don't see it from the street?

Well, we have, we are proposing, let me see if it's visible here. I'm looking at your site plan here. We are proposing a low property wall, and certainly we could have screening, vegetation screening.

This just overpowers the house.

Would you consider not doing those decorative vents over the... mean this is a very small comment compared to the size of the addition but the decorative vents over the archways so that it doesn't compete with those that are original to the house yeah absolutely I don't know

One question the lot is a hundred feet in the front. What's the what's the other dimension? I

When the homeowners purchased the property it was not designated historic we basically through conversations with the historic department we offered it as a to be designated The intent of the homeowner originally was to build a larger home To demolish this one Well, I don't know if demolished, but they were not constrained by historic sensibilities.

So this was designated in 2024.

As a result of significance request?

No, no, they came to our office because they wanted to see again to learn what they can do with it because of the age of the property. I think for George, it kind of triggered that likely you're going to have to see historic at some point. So why don't we go early? And there were some massing studies, I think, done for a larger two-story addition on that side yard. Again, this is one of those conditions that's hard to develop, right, because you have a double lot and a very small one-story house. So really a lot of any modifications to it you do to it are going to overwhelm it because of the amount of green space that there is. So develop a property. There was a much larger two-story at one. the early stages of this. I think there was multiple BOA reviews on this one, maybe four times? Yeah, three or four. On how to kind of, you know, play with the mass so that it didn't feel like this looming big two-story addition and kind of breaking it up to have that one-story little courtyard space and have the two-story really set back to the edge of the property. I, again, I hear your concerns, and we had them too. And we also have to think of the balance of like, because of the size of the lot, this could be much bigger. And again, the property owners did come to us, they ended up agreeing to the designation, they worked with that, they worked that out with us two years ago, and have been in the process since. They were excited because the chimney has that little W that they're restoring back, and their last name happens to start with a W, and it's in the historic photo. So I hear you, and if there's recommendations of maybe something that we could work on together to kind of mitigate some of those things, we'll do that, and I think that the homeowners would... Did you discuss landscape screening and anything to hide this section on the side?

Well, I knew that they were doing the— Because you're getting overwhelmed by the second story already, okay? And then we're adding this large piece that's almost the same size as the house over to one side. Even though it's set back, there's a great opportunity to create that as a special private courtyard, but where you couldn't see it, too. I mean, as a landscape screen, which would then—that would help reduce the massing that's being placed there. This is huge. It's really overpowering. But we hear you.

Yeah, no, and we can work with them again, any conditions that are proffered by you all can be added to the recommendation today. And if there's something that you all maybe wanted to come back to see, that is also an option too.

I hear what you're all saying. I think what we're all reacting to, George, is a circumstance not of your making, right? It's rare that we see a lot this large with a house this small on it, right? So by right, they have a certain amount of square footage they can build. And if the owner wants to build a large addition, which they technically have the right to do, it's difficult to balance kind of all that with the size of house that there is. It's a one-story, very small house. That being said, I think the decision to put that two-story volume on the back was the right one for sure. I'd rather see it back there than in the side yard. I think we're all kind of on the same page about that. The only thing that, and I understand why you did it, the change in roof pitch, right? You're differentiating. So on that front facade in the one-story addition, you're differentiating the pitch, which I get to differentiate the new addition from the old. And then you're, it's not even a concern. It's something that maybe we can further study with staff. That front facade on the addition, you're sort of mimicking the existing but changing it slightly, right? Instead of the large arch, you've got kind of a traditional arch opening smaller. The, the roof is, is a lower slope. Um, you know, I don't know if maybe, maybe changing that to, to a hip would, would kind of alleviate the thing to make it more clear there, there is a hip condition, like a shed condition, but, but, um, I think maybe that would help things if number one, that would sort of decrease the visual height of that addition. Right. You're sort of if you put a hip on that front, you're making it appear smaller than it is. You're kind of not confusing things with that existing gable. And I think if you did that, maybe that would be something that would help the project and would help us kind of get over that hump.

That would be much better than just taking away the decorative... That would, I think, help a lot. Much better than just taking away the decorative inserts. Because that would actually totally differentiate it. I mean, I'm not fond of two different arches on the front elevation myself. But, you know.

Yeah.

Because I think the existing historic home with that large arch should be the main focal point. And this other arch just confuses the issue. For me, I take away the arch also.

We also had that sensibility. It's just that they're both facing the street. And just to have a square opening... Seemed like 1980s classic weather. Well, not really 1930s.

No For me for me. I I think it would help but I Don't want to you know start designing.

That's my reason for screening it Just to take away that that blocky side Okay, anyway board we're our last Miss ever any comments Questions, suggestions, recommendations, denials, approvals, or indecisions?

The original square footage of the old house, what is it, whatever, was what?

1935.

Yeah, 1935. That square footage is what? And we're going to what? I mean, it's amazing.

It is 1,700 square feet, 1718.

Okay. And the new structure will be?

Basically, it's doubling the size of the footprint.

And what is the maximum FAR allowed on that site?

Yeah.

So maximum allowed is 4150. We're at 4019. And you're at 4015. Where 4,019, the maximum is 4,150.

Basically, more than doubling it.

Yeah.