Historic Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

We're still starting to see.

Yeah. Two. Coming together. Okay. We're good? Alright. I'd like to call

to order this meeting of Delray Beach Historic Preservation Board for May 7. Diane, can you please call the roll? Peter Dwyer. Here. Present.

Carol Perez is absent. John Miller? Here. Vlad Dimitriska was absent. Ezra Craig? Here. Chris Cabezas? Here. Jim Chart is

absent. I

don't know where

it is. K. Any changes to the agenda this evening?

No. But I will make a comment that it's long. So we're gonna try our best to be as expeditious as possible so we can get through all the items.

Yep. Great. Thank you. That's why we're starting without our illustrious leader this evening. So any minutes? We have four items of minutes here. First of all, any comments?

No comments. I'd like to propose a motion to approve the minutes as written.

Second. Okay. This is for all four.

Yep. For all four. Unless you

guys have Okay. Any

have We motion second. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Great. If there is anybody this evening who is willing or wishes to speak on any of the items, the the quasi judicial items this evening, please stand up and be sworn in at this time. Sorry.

Real quick jump. Well, let's go ahead and swear people in, but I think we missed a motion to approve the agenda. We did

the Okay. We'll go back

to that.

Okay. Sorry about that.

No. Okay. Okay. Sorry.

Yeah. If you're gonna speak, please stand up and be sworn

in. Sorry.

Please raise your right hand by vested in me

the notary of the state

of Florida. Do you swear from

the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?

Thank you. Going back one, can we get a motion to approve the agenda as written?

So move the agenda to approve. Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright.

Chris.

Okay. Swearing in. Anybody in the public who would like to speak on an item that is not on the agenda this evening, this is your opportunity. Looking at you, George. Alright.

Very good. Item seven, presentations. We have a presentation this evening. Michelle? Yes. Okay.

So my name is Michelle, principal planner with the development services department and we'll be doing the historic preservation board awards next. And I'm sorry if it's script, but I'm trying to stay on task. All right, good evening. I'm pleased to present the twenty twenty five Historic Preservation Board Awards in honor of National Historic Preservation Month. The national theme for preservation month this year is the power of place.

We join hundreds of communities as we celebrate the efforts and determination of many people who are committed to preserving culture and history across the nation. The city's HPB awards are bestowed upon property owners who have significantly contributed to their communities through preservation of the city's architectural and cultural heritage. Many others must be recognized for their work in preservation, including companies, design professionals, craftsmen, all who work creating and restoring the richness of the past, the vision of public officials who support preservation and legislation in their communities, and activists who help to tell the stories of history and culture and support the value of preservation. It truly takes a village. Before we introduce the award recipients, I would like to take a moment to recognize the members of the historic preservation board.

They're comprised of seven members who have volunteered their time to serve the city and the public in its effort relating to historic preservation. Our board members are Jim Chard, chair, John Miller, vice chair, Chris Cabezas, deputy vice chair or second vice chair, Pete Dwyer, Ezra Craig, Vladu Mitrescu, and Carol Perez. Thank you all for all of your hard work. This year's eligible projects were approved at the last meeting in April. The award categories include residential contributing for rehabilitation and addition.

Rehabilitation and accessory structure for a contributor. Addition for a contributor. Residential, sorry these are all residential categories. And then we have commercial contributing rehabilitation. But before I move over to the actual award categories, I wanted to highlight a preservation project that was quite a success the city undertook.

We're not awarding the city a certificate of achievement but I think we would be remiss not to identify this project. This is a Seaboard Airline Railway Station. This is an older photograph. This property sits just West of I 95 on the North Side of Atlantic Avenue. It's individually listed to the local and national registers of historic places.

It was built in 1927 and designed by renowned architect Gustav Maas. The building sat for many years under different ownership. The city purchased it and was utilizing it for storage and trying to envision what to do next with the building. There had been talks of renovation, maybe grants to do that renovation. And while they were working on their vision plan, unfortunately, the the building fell victim to a very severe fire.

This is aerial photograph from channel five news the day in February. This is right before the start of COVID in 2020. We lost the majority of the building, to that fire that day. We are very lucky that there were no tragic losses. There was a pretty severe backdraft that occurred that day. The firemen having been affected by that back draft. So we were lucky that we didn't lose anybody during that fire. But the building sustained, we inspected it and sustained significant amount of damage. You could see here in some of these photographs the original metal window in the upper left corner, the hollow clay tile that still existed. It was a construction method used at the time.

There was also some standard brick construction. These are just you devastating photographs to kind of relive. So the city commission in concert with our risk management division department under human human resources, realized that the building was insured and was able to utilize that insurance money to reconstruct. So they embarked on a project to reconstruct the building and this is it today. I actually took these photos on Monday waiting for that landscaping to grow in a little more.

This is the north side of the building. You can see that original Delray, Florida sign was preserved and reused in place. The original loading docks on the east and west side were restored, with their covers. The building is utilized for the human resources department and then in the south end which you're looking at here with the portico is the city's wellness facility. In the far left corner, you can kind of see under that arch, this is a historic luggage cart that was graciously donated by mister Joe Van Ness.

His grandfather, mister Calloway, a long standing member of the community as is mister Van Ness. He had this in his barn and the city staff restored it with some new wood and placed it at the site. So here are a few more photographs. We're really impressed with the level of detail that the contractor followed through with in that restoration. So it was considered restoration and reconstruction.

We encouraged the city staff, encouraged that left picture there, a little peek into the building method, you know, building construction method which shows the hollow clay tile at a point where it meets with the brick. This is in the lobby of the wellness facility. In the picture on the right, if you were to tour the building, I encourage you if you're interested look at it to go see it, it is open. There are elements that are kind of a nod to the railroad use that used to be here. Through the use of tiles that kind of look like railroad tires in a way, and some of the light fixtures and different elements.

The site's also been the recipient of some trees that were relocated there, and you can see them here in place, that they're doing fairly well. So many thanks to two different city commissions that were involved in working on this. You can see on the right the current city commission honored with a bronze plaque on the south side of the building. So quite an achievement for our city and that we were able to restore and reconstruct that building. So very thankful for all the hard work of the city staff, Missy Barletto and her team in public works.

Just a wonderful job that everyone involved did. So next I'm going to go into each of the award categories. I'll recognize the property owners as I speak at the end. If the property owner can come up and accept their certificate, I'm hoping our board chair will arrive before you leave so he can also sign the certificate. So keep that in mind folks when you come up for your award.

So the first winner is in category of residential contributing rehabilitation and addition. And the owner is miss Tracy Pickett of 108 North Swinton Avenue, which is situated within a locally and nationally designated Old School Square District. The existing one story home was constructed in 1925 in the bungalow architectural style. It's within the Old School Square District and I'm going to tell you a little bit about Old School Square now, but several of our award winners are also in Old School Square. The district is centrally located in Delray Beach and was named for the two historic schools that were saved and rehabilitated by local citizens in the city after being abandoned by the Palm Beach County School District in the mid nineteen eighty's.

The 1913 Delray Elementary School and the twenty five High School are situated on that site. Old School Square is the namesake for the district as a whole. Many of the houses that were built within this neighborhood were constructed for middle class families. But there is also a significant collection of larger mansions along Northeast 1st Avenue and commercial buildings along Atlantic Avenue. The housing stock ranges from early frame vernacular and bungalow style structures to grander Mediterranean and Victorian style homes and include minimal traditional homes built during and after the Great Depression.

The range of historic architectural styles are reflective of the various periods of development that Delray Beach experienced from its earliest days through recent history. In February 2022, miss Pickett came before the board and the board approved an addition and rehabilitation of her structure. The rehabilitation you can see here included restoration of the original front porch on the facade of the building and those bungalow piers were uncovered. A new rear addition was added incorporating a new garage as well with access off the alley. Swimming pool and parking trellis were also included in the proposal.

The proposal included a variety of materials, new and old. In some of the pictures you will notice that there is a metal shingle roof. There are brick paver, ribbon strip driveway harking back to the original front driveway that existed. Wood siding replacement and repair that occurred throughout the exterior of the building. The hardy board scalloped gable detailing on the front of the building and the wood bungalow porch supports.

This project serves as a wonderful example of an historic preservation and rehabilitation project that incorporated a significant addition to the rear of the existing home, utilized new and authentic materials while honoring appearance of the structure through the restoration of the original front porch. It contributes to the historic Swinton Avenue streetscape. This is an image of an aerial image that the owner provided. This was the best I could do with the old house. But you can see what a success it is to have an addition added on to a home with having minimal impact on the front of the home.

So this year, we would like to recognize and honor the property owner, miss Tracy Pickett, as the winner of the 2025 Historic Preservation Board Award in the category of residential contributing, rehabilitation, and addition. Congratulations, miss Pickett. The owners are not required to come up and say anything, but if you wish

I didn't swear myself in.

Isn't quite what I do. You can say

If you I'm sorry. If you could, if you wouldn't mind coming up to the podium. I don't have to. Okay.

Thank you.

Okay. The next winner is in the category of residential contributing rehabilitation and accessory structure. The owner is miss Belinda Kessel. Are you here? Where are you? She is not here. Okay. She's the property owner Of 125. It's also known as 121 And 125 Northeast 1st Avenue. The property is also within the national local and nationally designated Old School Square Historic District.

It contains two contributing residential structures built in 1949 in the frame vernacular style. They're single family residences. There's actually two units. The one in the back is a little bit larger than the one in the front, which the rear structure serves as an accessory structure. City records indicate that the main structure was remodeled and shifted on the site in 1952.

Sam Algren Sr. Is credited with a renovation to the home at that time period. Sam Algren is the city's first registered architect. He's our most prolific architect, designing hundreds variety of architectural styles. The alterations at that time included an entry to the south side of the rear structure, an open air porch on the north of the rear structure, a porch to the north of the front structure.

And again, we believe that the rear was the original main structure. It was indicated as building one on a lot of the building plans. The structure still contains some of their original wood casement windows. At the time here, they contained clamshell awnings, but also included vinyl siding and some of those porches were enclosed. The structures were in a deteriorated state when Ms.

Kessel purchased the property. In February 2024, HPB approved a request for exterior alterations to both structures, primarily restoration based and interior renovation. It did include restoration or bringing back that porch on the south side of the rear structure, hardscape improvements, windows and exterior doors, and a new mill finished metal shingle roof much like like miss Pickett's roof. The property owner and her contractor invited city staff to tour the property and structures during the renovation. The level of deferred maintenance that had occurred at the property over the years was significant.

These pictures don't do it justice. How how bad it was. It was deteriorated inside and out. Yet, miss Kessel was determined to save the structures and follow through with her vision to restore and preserve the property. The completed project will ensure the longevity of the Old School Square Historic District, and it nicely rounds out the collection of restored resources along Northeast 1st Avenue.

We would like to recognize the property owner, Ms. Belinda Kessel, as the winner of the 2025 Historic Preservation Board Award in the category of residential contributing, rehabilitation, and accessory structure. Congratulations, Ms. Kessel. Next, we have the winner of the category residential contributing edition for Mr. Timothy Lee McKinney. Are you here tonight? No. I'm so surprised. I thought he was coming.

The property is located within the locally designated Del Ida Park Historic District and contains a contributing one story single family residence in the '19 53 mid century modern styles of architecture. The Delaida Park Historic District is a 14 block suburban residential area just four blocks north of the heart of Downtown Delray Beach. Delaida Park was the city's first recorded in 1923, laid out in an interesting and unusual fashion, combining a rectangular grid with a series of diagonal streets. Most notable is Dixie Boulevard, which serves as the main concourse in the development. Having been laid out 20 feet wider than the rest of the streets and containing larger state size lots.

Motivated by patriotic spirit and the optimism of Florida's land boom, Delaeda Park originally contained streets named after six US presidents. Mister JC Secord of Miami organized the Ocean City Development Company and purchased the 58 track 58 acre tract of land. It contained 300 lots and three pie shaped public parks. Within days of the recording of that sale, it was reported that Delighted Park is growing fast as 58 lot lots had sold. Mister Frederick Henry Link, a former craftsman at Addison Meisner Industries, Yes, that Addison Meisner.

He came through and purchased a property and more than one, several lots, and one he crafted for himself. He constructed a Mediterranean or mission style home in 1923. It's important to note mister Link because of his daughter, Catherine Linkstrong. She lived on Dixie Boulevard in that home for many years as an adult, and she was Delray Beach's first woman mayor in 1954. In October 2022, mister McKinney received approval for a request to construct a 350 square foot accessory structure, which you see here.

It was in the backyard of the home. This is the front home, the main home, so you can see some of the architectural elements incorporated from that mid century style. The design of the accessory structure included that flat roof style, transom windows, shallow front porch, tongue and groove ceiling details, aluminum framed windows, brick support columns, and transoms on the front and sides of the building. The structure represents a modest improvement to the contributing property allowing for additional living space for the family. We would like to recognize the owner, Mr.

Timothy Lee McKinney, as the winner of the 2025 Historic Preservation Board Award in the category of residential contributing additions. Congratulations, mister McKinney. Oh, meant to show you the tongue and groove ceiling. Quite nice. Okay.

I did see Mr. Mayo in the audience. Hello Mr. Mayo. So category, there was a tie. This category is commercial contributing rehabilitation. The first winner we're going to highlight is Mr. Jaime Mayo and Mr. Michael Hanlon of H and M Architecture. The commercial office structure is located at 143 South Swinton Avenue within the locally and nationally designated Old School Square District.

The site contained a one story 1917 bungalow style structure. The original structure was built as a single family residence and was originally owned by John and Elizabeth Sundi. In August 2019, HPB approved a class five site plan, COA, landscape plan and architectural elevations. There was also a variance in a previous in lieu of parking request that was approved as well to allow for the conversion of residence into a commercial office and the expansion of the building by 2,826 square feet. The addition is primarily focused on the east and north side of the building.

There's also a new parking lot, landscaping, and hardscaping improvements. The proposal also involved restoration of a front porch. The renovation of the subject property was not for the faint of heart. As upon demolition of the interior of the property, the owners uncovered severe structural issues, including a roof truss system that had been damaged and were missing vertical supports. In some areas, there were tongue and groove pieces of wood propped up holding the trusses up.

And it's a makeshift attempt at stopping the roof from sagging. The property owners returned to the board to request approval to reconstruct the roof and structural wall members and also to allow for the installation of new support piers for the foundation. The structure is now completed with several of the original important elements to the structure such as the brackets, the cedar shake siding that was utilized, authentic and new building materials were incorporated into this project. Great care went into the details. I expect we wouldn't have expected anything less with these gentlemen being architects.

They took great care in their project. Today, the structure serves to welcome visitors to the Old School Square Historic District as it sits at the district's southern most boundary. Restoration, preservation, and rehabilitation of the property will ensure its longevity and continued legitimacy of the district as a hold whole. We'd like to recognize the owners Jaime Mayo and Michael Hanlon as the winners of the 2025 Historic Preservation Board Award in the category of commercial contributing rehabilitation. Congrats gentlemen.

Sure. I'll say a few words. Thank you. Well, it's it's an honor to be able to get the opportunity to continue the legacy of of a Sunday house. It was owned by Elizabeth and John, sold to actually his his sister-in-law who willed it to Benjamin Sunday and who did live there. And I believe mister Long even used to hang out at that house back in the day. Right, George?

Yes. Sister-in-law.

The sister-in-law. Yes. And she passed away and willed it to her nephew who happened to be the son of John Shawson. He kinda came all full circle. And I, of course, wanna thank this board and the previous boards. I think we were here through three boards during this process as we uncovered. And, of course, would love to thank Michelle and your team and and the city staff for all the work and the direction they gave us to us. We couldn't have done it without you guys. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay and our winner is the second winner, the tie in the category of commercial contributing rehabilitation. This is mister Ron Kursman. He was traveling, was not able to be here tonight, but mister Roger Cope is in attendance and will accept the award on his behalf. So this property is at 202 North Swinton, again in the Old School Square District.

The property contains two structures, a two story frame vernacular style residence constructed in 1922, and an accessory one story structure also constructed at that same time period. The main structure was originally located at the Saint Paul's Church property. It was moved to the subject property in order to allow for the construction of a new parish house for the church. In its original location, the structure was likely owned by miss Rebecca Taylor prior to 1935. George Long helped us with some information in sharing the book From Sapling to Sturdy Oak.

It's a Saint Paul's Church book along with his oral history. George also resides within the district and is a frequent flyer here at our board meeting. A review of the '22 and '26 Sanborn maps reveals evidence that the home was originally situated at the south end of the Block 62. And the 1949 Sanborn map shows the same home and the same footprint on the subject property, this current location. The original structure had a wraparound porch, which was later partially enclosed along with a cross gabled roof and as our Florida master site file form indicated attenuated Tudor esque gable details.

In 1984, the structure was significantly damaged by fire and later rehabilitated. It was converted to commercial use in 2014. And then in March '23, mister Kurzman came before the board and received approval for exterior modifications of the structure, of both structures, including window and door replacements and installations. A little change to the roof pitch on the rear structure, new roof material, siding repair, and some replacement. At a later meeting, he was granted approval to reconstruct a portion of that rear accessory structure, which had suffered some severe deterioration.

The improvements have been completed and include the use of authentic wood siding, wood detailing, new windows, porch details, roofing, landscaping, hardscaping. And here are just a few of the photographs of the detail work. It's it was done quite carefully and very well. Preservation of this structure on its prominent corner of North Swinton and Northeast 2nd Street, which 2nd Street serves as a bypass to the Atlantic, or pardon me, the I-ninety 5 area. That will continue this prominent corner and preservation of the structure will continue, and it will serve as a representation of this property owner's commitment to historic preservation efforts in Delray Beach.

So we would like to recognize the property owner, mister Ron Kurzman, as the winner of tie winner of the 2025 historic preservation board award in the category of commercial contributing rehabilitation. And, Roger I see that you're coming up to the podium and I'll hand you the certificate. Congrats Ron.

I'll just say a couple of words. Ronnie had 45 page speech prepared for tonight, so thank God he didn't make it. But in all honesty, there's a lot of people to thank. Michelle Hoyland and her staff, Michelle Hewlett, Katharina Paluotta who's back stage, Amy Alvarez, Anthea as well, the entire development services division, you guys for supporting everything that we did along the way. As you know, things are, you know, are challenging in some in regard, and so you supported just about everything that we ask you to support.

We actually have a phase two and a phase three that we might come back before you with, you know, in the next few months. But thank you very much. Month of May is always a very special month across the country for preservation, and we always appreciate what the city of Delray Beach does for all the local designers and owners that deserve these things. Thank you very much.

Also, you to Roger. Yes. Were you going to say that? Yes. Please do.

I was just gonna say thank you Roger for looking after this gem of Delray Architecture. So it's very much appreciated. So and congratulations to all of the winners tonight and everybody who goes through this process and takes on a rehabilitation project. It's very much appreciated. That's what helps keep Delray Delray and we appreciate it. Thank you Michelle for your very detailed and thorough and excellent presentations.

Thank you. And just as a reminder oh. This is a quick reminder. The award winners wouldn't mind hanging out for just a few more moments. I would really like mister Chard, our chairperson, to sign your certificates. He is due to arrive shortly. Thank you.

Okay. Have a pretty full agenda, so we're gonna get started on the quasi judicial items. I'm going to read the rules of said items. This hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the city of Delray Beach's quasi judicial rules. The applicant and the city shall be permitted to present their case.

The public shall be allowed to speak for three minutes each or for maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or group of people who are present but agree not to speak. The city commission, board, members, staff, and the applicant may be allowed to cross examine a witness. The city or the applicant will be allowed to for to offer rebuttal testimony. This decision to approve or deny an application or appeal may not legally be made upon personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not, nor may a decision be based on the number of citizens who support or oppose a particular project. The law requires that all decisions must be made on the basis of whether the project meets the requirements of law, the comprehensive plan, and the land development regulations.

I'm gonna hand the gavel over

Thank to

you. I'm worn out. It's all yours.

Okay.

Welcome. While Jim's doing that, I'm before, I'm just gonna ask if there's been any, ex parte communications on item a, which is ad valorem tax exemption twenty twenty five dash one sixty one.

No. No. None. None. I visited the site. None.

K.

For the record, my name is Michelle Hewitt, planner, and I'd like to enter agenda item eight a, 310 Northeast 1st Avenue, file number 2025Dash161 for an ad valorem tax exemption into record. The property owner is here to present.

Good evening. Appreciating that you have a full agenda. I'll try and move through this.

You want to start by just stating your name and address for the record? That would be great.

Joe Wagman. 310 Northeast 1st Avenue, Delray Beach.

Thank you very much.

Ready? Okay. And am I operating the Okay. So my wife and I purchased this property about three years ago, and it's the classic 1st Avenue World War two vintage cottage where there's many of them on the street and kind of a kid apart. So I'm really just gonna show you a few slides of the before, a couple of our challenges, and and after.

So this is first before shop. We had one of the last, maybe the last carport in the area that have all been converted, and we worked with staff to refurbish that, re

south

south West elevation, side mirror yard. This place had the most amazing stand of of bamboo, this massive whatever the right name is for a forest of bamboo. That was one of our challenges. This this would be before on the South side. That's a pretty good shot of the bamboo that we were dealing with.

It had to be thirty, forty feet tall. So we we I think we had most surprises that you can have, and we first found what looked to be a concrete bunker in the real yard, the rear yard, which turned out to be a very large septic tank, very well built. Then we had termite damage and a fair amount of the exterior. It was interesting. The house is built of the old Dade County pine, which in the structural part held up pretty well, but the shell was a real challenge.

So here we are after North Side, after on the south side. This is now that shot where we were on the west looking into the existing property. This is the current state. On the exterior, there's a one car garage now that abuts the alley. And after on the east elevation, the 1st Avenue facing.

And what we did with working with staff on the carport was to put sort of a transportation oriented and actually working with the board because you actually approve this carriage door kind of of approach. And that is our presentation for the ad valorem tax exemption application. Any questions?

Ezra? No. No.

Thank you. Maybe we go to staff first, and then if they have any questions for you, they'll call you back up.

Oh, okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Once again, Michelle Hewitt Planner. And this is for an ad valorem tax exemption for 310 Northeast 1st Avenue. Here we have an aerial of the subject property outlined in red, Northeast 1st Avenue is to the east. There's an alley to the west of the property. Some background, the subject property is located within the locally and nationally registered Old School Square Historic District.

The property contains a circa nineteen forty one story minimal traditional style structure that is classified as contributing within the district. Distinguishing architectural features include a secondary gable from the inset with the primary front facing gable on the east and a portrait size below the gable below supported by cross brace with posts. So just those elements that I just described, you can see on the the structure previously prior to improvements. This is the front. This faces Northeast 1st Avenue.

You can see that cross bracing in that porch there and portions of the carport. And then another image here of the front. Again, those porch elements in that carport and the structure prior to improvements. Here's the rear west elevation prior to the approved approve improvements. And then the side on elevation, this is where that carport that was enclosed is located.

And then another image here from the side, or south elevation. And some contextual images, to see what's surrounding the property. So this is the streetscape plan. This was came before the board. This was approved of the improvements that were approved.

So this is the survey prior to improvements. You can see the structure highlighted in blue. And this is the site plan the approved site plan after, for the Agvalorum request. And there was also a pool that was included with this request as well. And you can see those here, the blue being the prior to improvements for the previous structure and then the addition in the red.

This is the floor plan before improvements and then that addition in the red there. Everything to the right is the existing. And then here again, blue existing structure and then the red being the addition and then that outlined area is that carport that was enclosed. So at the top is the before prior to improvements and the after. It's below with the red showing the new elements.

You can see portions of the addition and that carriage door on the right there. This particular property had variance that was granted to allow the addition to match the existing structure's setback. Here is the rear, before on the top and then after improvements at the bottom. Again, at the top as before, this is the side elevation for the north side. And then at the bottom, there is afterwards, again red showing those improvements and additions.

And then here, other side on the south elevation, again, blue being existing and then red being the addition that was approved. And this is the rendering that came up with the board, the front, and then there we are at the back, the bottom there. And then some renderings of the pools located. And here is the finished. You can see the very well executed from the renderings.

The carriage doors, the cross spacing remained, the railings being removed. This is the rear where the pool is and that addition in the back. And then the sides are pretty narrow, so don't mind the wide angle. But this is the side here where the carport is located. And that concludes my presentation.

Okay, thank you very much. Any comments from the public? Okay. Now we're we're since we've already approved all of this, this is really to give the approval for the tax abatement.

Right? I guess this would be a recommendation to the city commission.

Right. Right. Mhmm. Okay.

I'm assuming there is probably not, is there any cross examination from the applicant or the staff about this presentation?

That was my assumption as well.

None from staff.

No. Okay, thanks. Just putting it on the record.

John? Great job. All in favor.

Okay. Yeah I'm in full support.

I'm supportive as well. Great looking project.

It's in your neighborhood, right?

Well, it's right nearby. Yes. Yeah. On the dog walking around.

That's a beautiful job. So call the roll please.

Need a Mr. Motion then a

I'd like to make a motion. Recommend approval to the city commission of the historic property ad valorem tax exemption application twenty twenty five-one hundred sixty one for improvements to the property at 03:10 NE first Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. Second.

Carol Perez is absent. Chris Kopezes? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Ezra Craig? Yes. Vlad Dumatrescu is absent. John Miller? Yes. Jim Chart?

Yes. Thank you very much. It's beautiful. Okay. I'd like to ask everybody's forgiveness. I just landed flying in from London, so I'm not sure if my head is here or back there. But I did see a lot of historic gardens.

Okay.

Would you like to introduce the CLA?

Sure. K. For the record, I'm Katharina Palavoda, senior historic preservation planner. I'd like to enter COA2025Dash159 into the record. It's a certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 108 Northwest 4th Avenue. The owners are here and they'll be presenting first.

Before we start on that, ex parte. None. None. None. Alright. Go ahead.

Hi. My name is Sandra Amani. I'm here with Nikki Mercedes, and this is 108 Northwest 4th Avenue as soon as it comes up.

And have been sworn in?

Yes. Okay. Great. Thanks. Okay. This is our after picture. We're here because we are requesting to leave the originally approved railings off the front porch. I'm just gonna wait for her to pull that up. Okay. I think I just hit this.

Okay. This is the original. I think you all remember when we purchased it two years without any windows or railings, and it was about just under a thousand square foot, completely gutted inside. This is the front of the house now with our landscaping, you know, all the work that went into it, which was quite a bit. This is a view from the north, and we're right on the property line.

So this is the best shot I could get. But you can see that the porch is eerie and open and, you know, really highlights the house, I believe. Here's a little close-up view. Let me know if you want me to slow down. There was, of course, with any historic project, a tremendous amount of work that went into taking it from this to this.

And I think it came out quite beautifully. Let's see, I think I have an aerial picture. We believe that even with an open porch porch that it maintains the look and feel of this, you know, important district. It restores the original structure that was dilapidated and it didn't have more ornate details to begin with. We picked that up from plans that the old owner had.

And, you know, as we went through the process, I really see a lot of houses in the neighborhood that don't have it, and I just love it without. We think it's very inviting, and I did provide some examples of other addresses in the historic district. Here's our old aerial view and where we are located in case you're not familiar, and here is the current aerial view of the property. You can see the plans. There are shutters.

Oh, it did provide an alternative, but should I not go there? Oh, okay. Well, he's possibly too. Nope. I don't wanna ask. I'm done. I'd rather not have railings if that would be approved. That would be greatly appreciated.

Say that again, which?

I would rather leave it open the way that it is. I think it looks spectacular. We get a lot of compliments from the neighbors, but I just think it's very inviting the way that it is.

Could you show it with the railing again?

Oh, I don't actually have a picture with the railing. What I was

Wasn't that a rendering or an elevation?

Oh, let's see. Let's get no. Oh, maybe I didn't include it. Is actually a different property that has a wood railing in the neighborhood, and it's quite busy and enclosed Because our porch isn't very big, it felt like it wouldn't really be usable for the space. You know, we wouldn't be able to fit anything on it or use it. It just would have a decorative railing. Railing.

Anything? Okay. Thank you.

We have the the approved rendering of the the porch in our in our presentation. Okay. So this is a COA for 108 Northwest 4th Avenue. The subject property is located within the locally designated West Settlers Historic District. It contains a contributing one story masonry vernacular structure that was constructed in 1949.

The structure's architectural features include a stucco interior, stucco exterior, chimney with a flat cap, a covered front porch on the east facade, porthole gabled vents on the east and north facades and flat stucco windowsills. My property is zoned single family r one a and the structure is currently being utilized as a single family residence. Okay. So this is the location. It's in the center of Northwest 4th Avenue on the West Side.

You did see this previously back in December 2023. This was approved for the rear addition on this on the existing structure. There was also some exterior modifications. Let's see. Specifically, like, construction of a new 810 square foot addition to the rear west side of the existing main structure.

The construction of a 227 square foot stone paver patio and pool deck to the rear of the residence, construction of a swimming pool, and exterior modifications to the existing structure including window shutters, repainting the door addition, and beveled columns. It also included a new concrete driveway with aluminum in board on board with fencing and stone papers. So these were completed. We did go out to do Steph went out to do a site inspection for building in order for them to get their CO. And that's when we realized the original back here.

So there's the survey staff realized that the front facade was missing the approved. So I'm gonna pass through some of these pictures. So this is what's currently existing on-site. I'm just gonna skip past these real quick. So these were the approved front elevation. So you'll notice they have the railings and then the beveled columns. So that was what was originally approved. We did notice that they were a little more simplified that we can kind of see on-site now. Okay. And then the railings were removed.

So staff did some research and I know I think I have it in my where I'm just gonna go back a little bit further. We did some extensive research research on the property and there was no evidence that the actual railings, the the the style of the beveled columns and the railings were actually original to the structure. We did find the original building cards and it didn't know anywhere that they have the railings in the column. We couldn't substantiate the fact that, you know, they actually have to have it. However, because this was the approved front elevation, it was up to the board to decide whether or not the more simplified columns were appropriate.

Miss Amoni did have some images of some other neighboring structures. So West Settlers was known for having more modest styles compared to other historic districts. So you will see throughout the district that these columns that they have existing on the structure is very similar to what is within the historic streetscape. Okay. So here we have renderings. So this is what the original columns and the rulings were approved as. Okay. So here we have so that's what was approved and this is what's existing on-site. Here's a up close picture of the porch. Okay.

In addition to the front porch, they are looking to change the color of the shutters. So here we can see the existing shutters on-site are white. And they're looking to do it's kind of like a blue gray sleepy hollow on here. So they're looking to change the color of the shutters. Okay.

These are the secretary of the interior of the interior standards that apply to this request. Okay. This is where we're noting that we we don't have concerns with the way the columns are as they exist on-site and there was no we had no historic records to show that, they actually had the railings existing on the site. Okay. Specifically relationship to materials, texture and color were visual compatibility, standards that applied.

So we noted that, and miss Imani had some more examples than the two that we had, but north of Northwest 5th Avenue, there's two structures that are owned by the CRA that have very similar columns. I think she had a picture of one of them. So it's up to the board to determine whether or not this would be appropriate for the structure as well as the district. Okay. And there are your findings. That concludes my presentation.

Any comment from the public? Any rebuttal? None? Hearing that, let's go to the dais.

I have no problem without the railing. I don't think the railing not being there detracts too much from the architecture of the the house. The staff didn't find any historic element of having the railing on the house. I'm okay with removing it from there.

I agree. I think it'd be appropriate either way And I would like to, you know, I defer to the homeowner on this one. And I'm okay with the color change as well.

Yep. Me too with the color.

I had a question on on the colors. Is there any historical reference to that color at all or is that

Not that staff's aware of. I don't know if the applicant has any comments. I can put it back up.

Sorry,

you've got to come up to the podium. Thanks.

Not that we know of. We just took a swatch book to some other homes in the district and tried to match what was already approved that would pop off of the house and not be so bland.

So you found some with roughly the

same color. Yeah, roughly the same color. So we just, we wanna stay within what's already there.

Okay. Peter?

Very straightforward reasonable request. I support it 100. Looks great.

There anything done on the roof was, I I didn't see any reference to that in in our materials. The

original we replaced the entire roof, which was what was approved in the original plans. And so we used exactly everything else in the house is exactly what was approved.

Okay. Yeah. Alright. I'll make a motion.

Yeah.

Chris? Make a motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness 2025Dash159 for the property located at 108 Northwest 4th Avenue, West Settlers Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

Second. Okay. Call the roll.

Okay. We'll move for missus Abstin. Chris Kavinsas? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Ezra Craig? Other other

is is And one

next.

And

Once again, this is Michelle Hewitt. And this and I'd like to read into the record COA 2025Dash153 for certificate of appropriateness and level one site modification for 403 North Sprinton Avenue. The designated agent is here to present on the property owner's behalf.

Okay. Hi.

So my name is Kate Tompkins. My boss's name is Alex Platt. He couldn't be here today because he's having a baby right now.

So

Okay. Could you hold one second? We need to do the ex parte question. Visited

the site. None.

None. None.

None. Go ahead.

So the address is 403 North Swinton Ave, Delray Beach. It's on the corner of Swinton and Lake Ida. So we would like to get approved the doors. Right now, they're the brown with the oval, and then the back door is just turquoise. So we just wanna replace it with impact

doors. Yep.

K.

So the windows, we just wanna remove the shutters and put impact windows. So and then also add two windows on the other side to make it even. So right now, you can see there's two. Just add two more. K? The next is the roof. Right now, it's like a brown shingle roof. We would like to replace it with a brand new roof metal. The third is paint. Right now, it's like a brown orange color, so we would like to paint it pink. I think it would really make a nice statement because it's on the corner.

Excuse me a second. We're hearing more of your conversation than the first, if you wouldn't mind. So

we would like to just paint it pink so it is a very important corner. And right now, it is like an orange brown. So and then the other thing is the gable vent. We would just like to replace it with a brand new one, either white or pink. So you can see what it looks like now. So it is like that orange orange with a brown door. So we just would like to clean it up and make it look historic and beautiful. And that's it.

Alright. Once again, four of the North Swinton Avenue certificate of appropriateness and level one site plan modification. Here we have an aerial for the subject property outlined in blue with North Swinton Avenue to the West and Northeast 4th Street to the South. Some brief history, the property is located within the locally designated Del Ida Park Historic District. It contains a contributing nineteen twenty five one story masonry vernacular style structure.

The structure was previously located at 74 Northeast 4th Avenue where it was moved in August 1975 to its current location. Prior to its relocation the structure was remodeled for use as a dental office. Also, Dalloween's windows were replaced with awning windows at that time. The original structure included front and rear porches, which appear to have been enclosed prior to 1970. And distinguishing architectural features include textured stucco walls, chimney, enclosed porches on the west and east elevations, awning windows with dimensional muttons, and a shingle roof with front and side facing gables.

So we'll look at some of those elements here. This is the front or west elevation. This faces North Swinton Avenue. Here we have the side or north elevation. You can see the existing colors, the windows, those shutters, and some in the gable feature. Here's the other side of the north elevation. This is interior to the site. Here we have the side or south elevation. This space is Northeast 4th Street. And then here's the rear or east elevation.

There's a parking lot on the other side of this elevation. So the request before the board involves alterations to the exterior of the structure as follows. The installation of a mill finished standing seam metal roof, installation of impact windows and doors, installation of two windows on the north elevation, repainting of the structure, removal of existing shutters, and replacement of an existing gable vent. So we have a survey with the property line outlined or dashed in red and the subject building footprint outlined in blue. Here we have the north elevation.

This elevation is proposed to have two new windows added. Added. The bottom is the proposed. On the left and the second from the right are the two new windows that are proposed in the north elevation. Additional modifications include the removal of the shutters on all of the windows and the replacement with the existing windows with impact clear, no tint, non reflective, no low e glass with white frames.

So here we have a permit from the 1970s where we where you can see that there was a window that existed on the north elevation, That's a little small little blue box there that they're bringing back. And based on the building footprint or the floor plan, it has a very symmetrical appearance. So it wouldn't be a surprise that there was also a matching window opposite of the second window that they're proposing on this structure. And so here on the top is existing south elevation. At the bottom is the proposed north.

If you were to invert them, they're intending to mimic the window pattern that's on the existing south elevation. The paint colors that are proposed on the walls is Sherwin Williams Teaberry. And for the fascia, it is Sherwin Williams bright white. There are no concerns with the proposed paint colors. They are relatively neutral and light in color and could be seen on this type of structure.

The proposed roofing is to go from the asphalt shingle to a standing seam metal finish roof. There are concerns with the proposed appearance slash material of the roofing. It is noted that the use of motor roofing on a 1925 masonry vernacular structure would not have been typical for the time period as it's more utilized for new construction or historically with wood frame structures. The original yellow card indicates the structure was originally wood frame, so a metal roof could be seen as appropriate if the structure had wood siding. The city of Delray Beach yellow card notes that a shingle roof was original to the structure and consideration could be given to the use of a metal shingle roof.

And this would allow for some longevity as well as keeping a similar roof profile that's currently there. Here we have a screenshot from our Delaware Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines discussing the replacement of roofs and the availability of materials. Our second staff report excerpt is from the Secretary of Interior Standards section. So the proposed window replacements are requesting to not have dimensional muttons. Rather, they'll have one over one window patterns.

Per our design guideline and the Secretary of Interior Standards, window types and designs are considered a distinctive feature, finish and construction technique, and that they do not recommend changes to the appearance of windows that contribute to the historic character of the building by replacing materials, finishes or colors which noticeably change the sash depth or the reveal. And here is a screenshot of the Secretary of Interior Standards and Guidance where we highlight the it's not recommended to change the appearance of windows that contribute to the historic character of the structure. Here are the applicable Secretary of Interior Standards highlighted that were used to analyze the request. And here as well for the Visual Compatibility Standards. And our certificate of appropriateness findings.

That concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Any comments from the public? We have a quiet public this evening.

If you'd like to make a comment, you just need to come up to the podium and introduce yourself. Thank you.

Hello there. My name is Elliot. I just wanna know the structure itself, it was a dentist office for a long time. Do we have any idea what it's gonna be converted into at this point?

Typically Is that allowed

to be said or no?

Typically, they'll just take your comments and then if they they wanna address them and either the applicant or the or the staff, they'll they'll they'll answer it.

Okay. If we could have your address.

My address? Yeah. Well, we were the actual owners of the property next to this. Do you see the green one right there? Mhmm. So we we have that property there. The the cottage is a 1941 property. So we've been seeing this property for a good five years and just saw that it was sold and under contract. I'm just kinda curious as to what it's going to be. Become like another office, a residential, we don't know. Okay. That's all.

Could the applicant address that?

Office. Okay. Not a dentist office. Okay.

So it's a commercial office, not a Okay. That's all all

right. Thank you.

Anybody else have any comments? Robert? Consider it done. Thank you. Alright. Any rebuttal from the applicant? None? You're in agreement with the staff? Okay. And any rebuttal from the staff?

None from staff.

Okay. Let's start the discussion. Peter, do you wanna lead off?

Sure. I'll lead off. Nice to see so many of my neighbors here tonight. This is unusual. Nothing on TV. Thank you for coming. This project is is very prominent. I walk by it a couple times a week, maybe more. And it's nice to see some improvements coming down the pike. It definitely needs attention.

It looks like from the staff report that the original windows were jealousy, which if anyone is familiar with those, they provide no protection at all. They barely keep the rain out. So those windows were changed apparently in 1975 to what we see in the structure, which are definitely not impact windows. In order to preserve a structure in the climate that we have, it has to be updated and the windows are a big part of that. And then the roof of course.

Metal, although it we're seeing a lot more of it and it's not always preferred for historical value, it's the best roof you can have on a structure. And with the real estate values you probably don't wanna do this twice. So I think I'm in full support of the changes. I think the colors are are very benign. They're not gonna create any big issues. It's not a hot pink, very mild pink. And the existing shutters don't contribute to anything. They're not even sized properly. I don't know if we have an architect here but you can see that they're they're just slapped on there. They don't do much to provide any relief.

So it's nice to see the investment in this project. Thank you.

Peter, one question. I think in the staff report they talked about metal shingles. Is that something you have thoughts about?

I haven't seen them used very much. They're not really preferred. Michelle has talked about them a little. Maybe she can bring us up to speed in one of our meetings. Okay. But I haven't seen them.

I think Michelle wants to make a comment.

While walking over here. Yeah. One of our award winners oh, two of them? Oh, you're right. Two of our award winners actually have the the metal shingle. It's 10 oh, 125 Northeast 1st Avenue and 108 NE Swinton have fishing

holes. I

know we also have an example in the Marina Historic District but I can't remember what the

It's becoming more and more popular. But I did, to be fair to the property owner, Mr. Platt, we did discuss the metal shingles. Think that's question. Question.

I good finish roof, standing seam, and it's a masonry vernacular structure too. We just think this probably was a framed vernacular structure originally. There's clues. But looks stucco, so we thought that's a board review item. I think what somewhat pushed it to the board for review was more the windows material.

So it was the lack of muttons. We had a long discussion with the applicant about that. He said, you know, he's taking the shutters off. He understood those were not appropriate in size, but he wanted to take a shot shot and see if the board would approve the windows with no muntins. We've identified in the staff report where the concern lies with that and the roof. Thank you.

Anything else? No. I think that it was built with jealousy windows apparently, which if we had an image of those, I don't think we'd be real fond of it. You'd have a lot of vertical or horizontal lines. So

We can't confirm if every window was jealousy. Right. It used to be over on Northeast 4th Avenue, and it was a dental office over there. And then it was moved to this site, which I found very interesting. It was moved as a dental office and and continued. But at the time frame it was built, I don't know that jealousy, I've researched it a bit. It's possible that they could have been jealousy but it's more likely that they single hung.

Right. I think that their selection is probably based on the use since this is going to be an office and not a residence. You it's better to have unobstructed views from your your windows than having muttons.

Well I understand that.

So that's a consideration.

Don't wanna argue

that before. Unless she has a question I think.

Right. Just, my opinion I think that I'd probably prefer muttons if it were a residence and I'd push for it. But in this case, since it is an office, I'm open to what they have.

Chris? Well, I agree that a metal roof is the most practical roof. And also, impact windows are essential, so I'm I'm okay with that. I'm okay with the color choices. I do think though I am hung up a little bit on the standing seam roof type and not having the the muttons on the window. I think those create the historical look, and it was on the house previously. So I I I'm hung up on those. I I think the project would be better if it had I don't know if can I say that? The

I mean, you've referred to how you think that they are more historically appropriate, I think.

Mhmm. Yes.

You know, if you're saying better for the fact that they you think that they better meet the land development regulations and the and the guidelines, then, yes, you can absolutely say that.

Yeah. So those are the two items that I I think the metal shingle having just seen the other properties with it seems to fit the character of the historic nature of the house better. My thoughts. Okay.

John? Yeah. So the easy things to me, obviously, the doors, replacing the windows. The shutters I think look pretty pretty bad. They're not appropriate as they stand. The color was one thing that I really was a little concerned about because, you know, no way, shape, or form is that a historical color. It is pretty light.

Unknown color.

I mean, I I looked it up and I I a 100% guarantee that staff is going to get phone calls when this goes up. How did that color get approved? So I'm okay with going on the majority on this, but I I I still have concerns about the color. The windows, I kinda would defer to Pete on this. I I agree if it was a residential, I'd like to see the the muttons on there, but without it, if it's an office building, I'm I'm okay with it.

This building needs some TLC for sure. It's been sitting in this condition probably for thirty years. I went to school there and it looked almost exactly the same across the street in the late seventies, early eighties. So or close to it. So, yeah, I'm I would like to hear maybe a little bit of discussion.

As far as the standing seam metal roof, I'm okay with that. I think it's appropriate to the south you have one, and to the north you have it. And, you know, with the trends that they are, I know a dimensional tile roof would look great or even putting a different material in there altogether would be okay, but I'm okay with the standing seam metal roof. But the color and the windows, I'm still a little little hung up on. Ezra?

Yeah, I agree with John. Think generally this is I'm sorry. I agree with John. I think that I'm okay with most of it. I you know, I'm new to the board, so I will show my inexperience.

To me, a structure whether it's commercial or residential, if we're trying to have historical significance, to me there shouldn't be a differentiation. That may be something that you as a board in your previous have seen that there should be a differentiation. So I would prefer to have the windows be appropriate, and I'm concerned about the color as well.

Yeah, the the And I'm assuming, and Pete correct me if I'm wrong, if muttons did go on this they're gonna be the plastic applied would to the be glued on probably.

Just applied with some silicone. So they're not gonna look like a nice wood window.

They do some of them I know you can get it with them built into the window. They are not affixed to the glass so they get mildew and everything behind. That looks even worse. Yeah. So I I think you could go either way on this and I don't wanna belabor this one. So Yeah. I think we're kinda divided as a as a board here. Right?

I realize the pink color is not historic, but it also isn't a really bright pink. So I'm not sure it stands out, but I guess you you believe that some neighbors will call TV

Staff didn't have a problem with the color. Do you wanna hear what the staff has to say about the color and maybe the windows? Sure.

Color is I think back to the days when I was being trained under Pat Casey. It was one of the simplest things to change. So that was somewhat the outlook on color. I do understand what Mr. Miller is saying that we'll probably get calls, but this

is

why it's here before the board. If the only thing they were coming in for was color, I might have approved it administratively because I feel like it's fairly a pale color, which might have been utilized in an older time period. As far as the windows are concerned, the muttons would not be glued on. They come as if you decide as a board to require the muttons, if you could show the picture with the mutton pattern of the existing. That picture was good, Michelle. Please, the elevation picture. The window, when it's ordered, comes with the installed. They are more of like a clip in, so it's more of a pressure clip. There's no glue or anything.

But it's not a true divided light?

No. 90% of 99% of the windows that you're seeing, aluminum framed windows with, that is how they're installed. And so that part of the secretary of the interior standard provides the guidance. So if they had if they had come in with no shutters, muttoned windows, a pink house, a shingle roof, or a metal shingle roof, the whole thing would have been admin approved. We wouldn't be at the board.

So, you know, again, the color, we're raise a concern I think from our perspective, but the Muttons did. And as far as whether it's commercial or residential, if I may speak on that for a moment, it's an adaptive reuse of a single family house. So while yes, the use is office, we still want to emulate the appearance of a single family house. And that's a standard. You know, it's not a subjective staff comment. We're utilizing something that's provided on specific guidance with the secretary of the interior and the Delray Beach preservation guidelines.

What about nearby houses? Are those residential or commercial?

So the one to the north is residential. I heard someone mention about the metal roof. It's a frame structure. So frame structures are where we were seeing metal roofs at the time period of, you know, these homes being built. The one immediately across the street to the south is commercial. Directly to the east of it, behind it, is a little mission style structure that's a pretty pale blue. That's commercial. So it's a mix right in the general vicinity. This is like the last one that technically is RO zoning. The one immediately to the north is part of RO, and then all of that north of that is straight residential.

Thanks for letting me speak on that.

I'd like to ask the applicant a question if you wouldn't mind. Have you you're the represent representative of the owner?

Correct. Because he's having a baby.

So are has there been any communication on the muttons on the windows? And if this board did require those, is that something that

If it's

you would be okay with?

He will he will do it. He just wants to get this done and make it nice and So

not gonna go to the mat over

No. He's not. He's

not. Okay.

In that case, I'd like to make a motion unless anybody else has any discussion.

Well, Jim know Jim about the roof?

Well, we did talk about the roof. I I would prefer seeing metal shingles, but if as staff says that frame houses of the times tend to have raised metal standing seam.

Is that correct?

So

we think, and I've had discussion with the property owner, we think it was a frame structure probably with siding that was later stuccoed. I've encouraged him to look when they're doing interior demolition, but I can't prove that. So I think standing seam metal on a structure like this, if you're making a decision based on the Secretary of the Interior standards, that it would be appropriate, that's your decision, not so much about what the other structures have. I think the city attorney would say it's case by case. So you could make that decision.

So it doesn't need to have the siding to have the metal seem co correlate with that.

I I think the board could approve it on this structure. If if it were maybe a not quite a vernacular appearance where we wouldn't have seen a metal roof, we would be identifying that for you, but I think possible.

It's difficult

at this point in my opinion to we've approved probably a standing seam metal roof in every meeting over the last two years almost. And there's gonna continue on so in my opinion

You guys

are not precedent setting so it is case by case.

But in my mind that ship has sailed when it comes to this. I would love to see some variation at some point but I understand why this is happening.

Could we ask the applicant if they've discussed that? Would they be willing to do the metal shingles if requested?

He said that just to do the metal roof for this.

I'm sorry. Said only

only a metal roof for this.

Stick well, metal there's metal shingle? Not the shingles.

He just hit the

Okay. Standing seam.

The standard.

And I I know I'm sorry. I forgot your Kate. Kate, I'm sorry. We did talk, the owner and I, and his roofer doesn't have the availability of metal shingle. So he would have to kind of start over and he wants to stick with that roofer. This is what he told me. So I think if you were to make some kind of alternate decision and he wasn't pleased with that, he would have to come back to the board and talk to you more about it.

It'd be appealed as a hardship.

One other question I had. Did I hear you say that there may have been colors similar to this in the same historic period?

Yeah I think pink, I know John that you're saying pink would not have been utilized but pink totally could have been utilized. Okay.

I stand corrected.

What was the date? In the forties was this or the twenties? The easiest thing to change. So it allows some expression I think for property owners. 1925. It probably was white, realistically, but, you know, it does allow some modern expression of our home of our property So

are we suggesting then that we have one condition of approval being

the That was

gonna be my motion.

Okay. Let's hear it.

Alright Mr. Chair I'd like to approve the certificate, move to approve the certificate of appropriateness eness 2025Dash153 for the property located at 403 North Swinton Avenue, Delaeda Park Historic District by finding the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets criteria set forth in land development regulation subject to the following condition, that the new windows contain a mutton pattern similar to existing as shown in the plans.

Second. I'll second that motion.

Discussion? Okay. If you'd call the rule, Diane.

Carol Perez is absent. Chris Campeziz?

Yes.

Peter Dreyer? Yes. Ezra Creek? Yes. Vlad Dimitrescu is absent. John Miller? Yes. Jim Chard?

Yes. Thank you.

Next we have agenda item 8D. I'd like to read into the record twenty twenty four, COA twenty twenty four dash two five seven for a certificate of appropriateness, relocation, and variances for the property located at 2 North Dixie Boulevard. The architect is here to present on behalf of the owner.

Before we get started, mister Cope, is there any ex parte communications from the board?

Visited the site? I spoke briefly to Kristen Finn about this one.

None. None.

None, but I do walk by it every day.

And a lot of walking.

Yeah. My dog. It's

part of your

research for you.

It's part of my research. Yeah.

And it looks like you guys may have gotten an email on your server related to

this. Yes.

There was an email that came through to the city server from a neighbor and mister Cope as well responding to that email. Okay.

Okay. I don't have it

in my email.

I didn't see it. Alright. For the record, Roger Cope, Cope Architects Inc. 701 Southeast 1st Street in the National Marina Historic District. I'm here with mister EJ Hazard, the owner of the property. Bought it fairly recently. He and his lovely wife are gonna make this their home with their two children, two daughters. They researched historic properties for many years before they decided upon this one. So they are very educated buyer and I've had an absolute pleasure working with him and his family. They've been fantastic.

I want to thank Michelle and her staff, these two young ladies up here, again for their guidance all along the way. And again thank you guys for the time tonight. I was told I have fifteen minutes so I'm gonna kinda fly through the project in a certain respect. It's a little bit unfair. I mean we we've worked a good solid year and a half on this thing and to get fifteen minutes to to present it is sometimes not not not, an easy thing to do.

But this is an image and, this is an image of the front of the house. And, Peter, you're you're a neighbor. You've walked the property or walked the the the site, the block. I I I how many of you I'm gonna ask two questions during my presentation. How many of you have ever lived on a cul de sac? Nobody? My back? No. Well, you. Anybody? No. I live on a cul

de sac.

You you do? How many others live on that cul de sac with you?

Four or five houses.

That's a normal cul de sac. My my client has a house on a cul de sac that is not normal. He is the only resident on the cul de sac. He we have neighbors, but they're not on the cul de sac. And I'll show you what I mean if I can figure this thing And it's it is a cul de sac.

This is a map, a historic map of the neighborhood, And this is in the the Delaida Historic District. So it's a wonderful neighborhood, very family oriented. And we are on Dixie Boulevard, which is the diagonal cutting across this map. We are at the extreme upper end of this, though the upper left hand quadrant of this slide. Dixie Boulevard used to go all the way through Swinton, which is at the top of the slide.

It no longer does that. It was converted by the city of Delray Beach into a cul de sac and we've worked with staff to try to figure out when that happened. It's almost irrelevant. It happened forty years ago. Late eighties, early nineties. Late eighties, early nineties. So so it forever changed the dynamic and the DNA of that end of the street in our opinion. And I say that because and this is a black and white photo of it. We are the house in the extreme lower left on the diagonal, the last house at the bottom. And and this is this is a church now sits a beautiful church now sits on the opposite side of Swinton Avenue.

So many many many things have changed since this photo was taken place. And our house is the one that's on a weird weird angle, which all of the others on our block are not on. And they're the only exception being the opposite end of the block, which is unfortunately outside the slide. But that is our site. That is our house as it currently sits, and we are focusing on this because we are asking to to be able to pick this house up and reposition it on the house on the site so that we can make better use, more more appropriate use of both the house and the site that we're left with.

So we studied for six months how to how to reestablish this house. We we're bound by two public right rights away, North Dixie to the left, upper left, and then our our street to the south, bottom of the page, is Southeast 5th Street, which back then was called Coolidge Avenue. We have decided to reposition the house where I'm showing it in this slide. We would the primary justifications for this is to make it orthogonal to Dixie Boulevard which in which is a fancy word of wanna take the angle out of the site out of the way that it sits now. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever from a vehicular standpoint, from a pedestrian standpoint, from a user standpoint, from a car going down Dixie Boulevard trying to appreciate the house standpoint.

So the house as it sits now has no relationship to either of the two streets. And and trust me, we thought long and hard about how to maybe perhaps orient it toward Northeast 5th Street, but that's not the primary street that it was intended to address. So we've positioned it where we're showing you in this slide. Actually, And I'm gonna back up a little bit. We are asking also to demolish some aftermarket additions that were made to the house over the years that we think are detrimental to the house itself.

This is our result in site plan with the historic house up on the right hand portion of the slide and an addition to the south side of the of this slide. Again, everything orthogonal to North Dixie Boulevard. And again, we're the only resident on the cul de sac portion of the street. It's a park like setting basically down at this end of the street, which we find very favorable and wonderful. Staff asked me to do about 18 different site plans, so I apologize.

There's so I've never done so many site plans in my life, but and here's one that they asked me to show that's in concert with our neighbor to the west. So that would be to the upper right hand side because she has a driveway that's more than 50 feet away from us. But we thought we would show that just to show that we're not disrupting her property and her nor her driveway. So staff likes to see imagery of the block, and so our our proposed structure is on the upper row far right hand side. Our immediate neighbor is the house next to that.

The immediate neighbor next to that is in the middle of the page and so on and so forth. I threw onto this slide two other projects that I've done on the block that are that happen to be on the other side of the street, those are Olga Adler's former home and missus Tiffert's home there in the middle of the page. So we're very low slung. The purpose of this is to show the massing maybe in in context of what what's existing on the lot. So we're very low slung.

We're not proposing a second story or a third story. We're a single story home. And by the way, when we relocate the home, we're not raising it any more than than what its finished floor is now. We're keeping it exactly at the same finished floor that that it that currently exists. The prior owner was very interesting in that they had a a relative, a young lady who was, like, dabbling with with the house architecturally.

She she was obviously sort of studying things for her mother or her grandmother or whomever owned the home. And so we found some of her sketches that we found to be very helpful in the way we went about approaching the concept that mister Hassard wanted to put forward. So this is the demolition of of the shaded areas are little tiny pieces of the existing house house that we're choosing to ask for the right to demo. And the first is is it's got a single car garage that is very unusable. You can barely get a car in it, and we we we'd like to take, like, three quarters of that away.

And then the little thing on the right was an aftermarket addition that was tacked onto the side of the house. We'd like to take that away. And there's been a bunch of things cobbled in the back of the property, which is at the bottom of this slide that we'd like to also take away. And I I don't think staff has any disagreement with what we're trying to do there. So we all know that this is this this house was built in 1937.

So this is 2025. So very young family, two two children, you know, certain lifestyle demands certain spaces that a 1937 house never never had. So we have to add those amenities onto the property and create the home, that my clients, are are hoping for. We're gonna take the existing home, and we're gonna vault all the ceilings within that home. It's a hand framed home.

We're gonna make we're gonna make the interior of that home, very vaulted, very natural, and very old Florida in terms of of the structure. And it's going to house only the kitchen, the dining, and the living room, and a small office. So it's we're gonna completely repurpose what the original uses were within those spaces. The addition then will become the new master, the girls' two bedrooms, a TV and family area, a guest bedroom, and a two car garage. By code, we're obligated to contain and house two cars, not one.

So we are not proposing a three car garage or a two and a half. We're proposing a two car garage. And we've loaded that garage to the extreme west end of the lot and are taking full advantage of the existing driveway that we inherited. We're not changing the driveway into the site at all. So we think that that's a positive attribute to our design.

This is a simple roof plan that we should probably shouldn't spend too much time on. And so staff likes me to present the image of what's existing versus what's proposed. So on the top of these next few slides, you'll find the existing elevation. So this is a very, very unusual house in my opinion. I've been doing this for forty years.

Never seen a house framed like this nor designed like this. It's got a main body right in the center of it and two wings to either side. The one on the left is a useless sort of garage, and then the one on the right are is the bedroom wings, believe it or not, which are very, very modest in size. Never seen a house like this in my life. So Department of secretary secretary interior standards recommends that in in in presenting a a presentation for the design of an addition to that structure, you you're you're supposed to take those qualities that that piece of architecture offers and not copy them, not mimic them, but complement them.

So we're careful not to complement or exactly replicate what what we have, but we're we are of the opinion that we're supplementing the original piece with similar piece of architecture, which is the image on the bottom. We're changing it all windows and doors, putting a a brand new roof, finished roof on it. We're keeping the two wings of the original historic home. Again, eliminating the garage component from it and and not allowing the new garage to face any public right away. The garage door will not face Dixie Boulevard nor the South Street.

So in this image, the garage door is to the far right on the bottom slide, and I'll show you on a different slide. But so this is our this is our public facade now. Before, with the house on the angle that it sits on, there it it's a very obscured and unappreciable facade. So we're trying to address Dixie Boulevard, and this is the image that that is most important for that public persona. So I introduced transom windows to all new windows in the addition.

So I'm doing that here as well. I'm I'm reintroducing a wing onto the new addition to to become a third wing, if you will, and complement those two on the original house. And and the the original photo that I started out with was of the front porch of the original house, and it really is where the only detail of the house exists. The these crosshair column porch supports that are that we're going to highlight and and make an homage to and bring over to the new addition, but in different ways, not in in the form of columns. So moving around the house, this is the east elevation, top and bottom.

We are going to introduce a pool in into the, into the site. And I can go back to the site plan and show you where that pool is if we wish. We're taking the rear of the house, which was anchored by a sunroom. We're taking off where all the cobbled on non elements that are not original, and we're re exposing the sunroom, we're going to use a little bit of conjecture in that we think we know what it must have looked like when when it was built in 1935 or 1937. So we're gonna bring that back.

Roger, you're running out of time.

Am I? I'll wrap up

real run out of time. So but if the board's okay with it, they can let you

wrap I think I can wrap up in four minutes maybe if you three. Would you take three? I'll try to do it

in three.

This is this is the rear of the house with that sunroom that I just spoke of where all the floor to ceiling windows are centered on the swimming pool that's just out in front of it. Public will never see this. And we are fencing in the entire property and completely relandscaping the property. Property is incredibly wild right now with overgrown landscaping. And we've we've been biting our tongue trying not to clear it, but we certainly will be taking all the exotics out of there.

This is the elevation with the garage on it and Essentially facing Swinton Avenue which is a couple 100 feet away, but not exposed to either of the two primary residential streets. So the house is gonna be all white. We've got a few shutters here and there. We've got a little bit of woodwork here and there. Standing seam roof that we'd like to put on it.

Currently has a flat concrete tile. It's got a crazy salmon color on it currently. We don't like that at all. We've got beautiful doors and windows that we're incorporating into the project. The young lady that I spoke of earlier designed an arbor that we're going to execute for her on her behalf, and we're gonna put this out along the the sidewalk, the public sidewalk that leads up to the front door of our historic house.

And our neighbors are wonderful designs. This is our immediate neighbor. It's got a historic component to the right hand side of this slide. She did an addition ten years ago, which is most of the left hand side of the slide. This is the house next to her. It's on a very, very wide lot, and I've shown this in my in my streetscape images earlier. This is the house next to that and so on and so forth. That's the end of the slides. EJ, do you wanna say anything at all? You've hit your time limit.

We're we're okay.

Both of us are available for any questions that either Michelle may have or you guys may have, and we thank you for your time. It's been a long road. We're happy to be here. Thank you very much.

Once again, Michelle Hewitt, and this is a certificate of appropriateness, relocation, and variances requests for to North Dixie Boulevard. Here we have an aerial with the subject property outlined in blue. North Dixie Boulevard is to the Northwest of the structure, and then to the South is Northeast 5th Street. Some background, the contributing property is zoned r one double a in the locally designated Del Ida Park Historic District. The 1937 structure was designed in the mace new vernacular style and according to the city building cards yellow card, it originally contained a garage and open air porch on the front of the structure with cement tile roofing, wood frame construction, and stucco on wood walls.

The existing one story thirteen ninety three square feet wood frame structure contained double wood posts with X detailing, a chimney, six over six hung wood sash windows with operable shutters and composition shingles. This particular structure has an unusual configuration on the site due to North Swinton Ave, North Dixie Boulevard, and Northeast 5th Street previously connecting at the southwest corner of the property. The cul de sac was created at the end of North Dixie Boulevard to assist with traffic calming for the neighborhood which you can see where they previously connected and then that cut off for the cul de sac. Going through some images of the existing property. This is the what would be would have been would have been the front of the property that would have faced the corner when all the roads were connected.

This is where the one one car garage, that open air porch and those X detailings are located on the southwest elevation. Here we have the side or northwest elevation. This doesn't directly face North Dixie Boulevard, but you can see it from North Dixie Boulevard. Here is the side of the northwest elevation as well. This is towards the back half of the structure.

This is the other side. This faces well, faces Northeast 5th Street. This is the corner. There we can see that garage on the left and then the other side of the structure on the right. Here is the side as well as the structure here.

And this is the northeast elevation. This faces the interior of the site. So the request before the board is for relocation of the existing structure on the site, 2,227 square feet in additions, a total of 3,620 square feet, exterior modifications with ground level improvements, a variance to reduce the required 30 feet front setback to 22 foot six, and a variance to reduce the required 10 foot side interior setback to a range of six foot five to seven foot six inches. So here on the screen is the existing survey with the existing structure and its existing configuration highlighted in blue. This is the existing site plan.

You can see the property line in red and then of course the existing in blue. So here with that first request is the relocation. You can see the building footprint, the outline, and then the proposed relocation in the shaded. You can see its change in orientation and sighting on the property. And this is the proposed site plan.

All of the red elements are new. The blue is the existing structure. There is a pool to be proposed in the rear, and then you can see that new widened motor court where the previous driveway was located. And then here we're just calling out the two variants requests so you can see how they are relative to the structure in the site, which we'll discuss later in the presentation. Here we have the existing floordemolition plan where you can see the existing building footprint and then the darker brown or dark orange sections are to be removed, including that garage, portions of that garage and some smaller additions that are proposed for demolition.

This doesn't constitute more than 25% of the structure, therefore they didn't have to request a full demolition. This is the proposed floor plan. On the blue is the existing and red is the proposed. In this configuration, this would be facing North Dixie Boulevard parallel to North Dixie Boulevard.

And

then this is the proposed roof plan, again, existing in blue and proposed in red. So looking at the elevations on the top is the existing in blue. This is what would be the front. This is would have been the front when all of the roads were connected. You can see the garage on the left and that front porch.

On the bottom is the proposed where you can see the addition relative to the existing in blue. The modifications to the existing structure include a new bronze standing seam metal roof, new impact windows. Once the garage is proposed for removal, there'll be a new wall put in place. So that's why it's in red on the left there and then of course the new addition on the right there. And this elevation here would be facing North Dixie Boulevard entirely.

Here we have the existing side or northwest elevation on the top And then the bottom is the proposed side or northeast elevation. Those directions change because it's been relocated. And you can see again existing in blue and proposed in red. So again, the roof, the windows, any removed removed walls for the demolition, we've just highlighted in red so you can see where they have to enclose that. And then there is that pool on this bottom, on the left side that you can see.

Here we have the existing rear or northeast elevation, the space interior to the site. And then with the relocation, it'll be near more so facing Northeast 5th Street. Majority of the rear will be new and they're exposing the enclosed sunroom and adding on to the roof on the back on the right there. And then you can see the pool at the bottom. And then here we have the existing side of southeast elevation, and then on the bottom is the proposed side or southwest elevation.

This will be facing the corner, the bottom left corner of the site. And you can see the new two car garage that's proposed there and the new appearance of this elevation. Here we have a streetscape plan as this is at the end of the block there on the far right and then you can see the other structures that exist along the street.

So

these are the proposed colors and materials on the structure. The walls are to be painted Benjamin Moore China white. The columns, decorative elements, and doors are to be wood. The frames are proposed to be bronze. The standing seam metal roof is to be a darker bronze color.

And then the shutters are proposed to be that navy blue color there. So here we have an excerpt from the Secretary of the Interior Standards. There are a series of new elements that are being added that currently don't exist on the structure, including solid pane windows, bronze metal roofing, and heavy timber construction feature, which is currently not seen on the structure. There are concerns with the bronze color as this isn't a color that would have been utilized on the structure and nor is it commonly seen throughout the district or any of our districts. There is also concern with some of the proposed windows relative to the existing structure as they are substantially larger and introduce new window types that don't exist on the structure nor would they have been utilized on the structure.

Specifically, the use of a transom window that's proposed on top of the single hungs, again, as it doesn't exist in the contributing structure nor is it considered appropriate for the masonry style, vernacular style. And they create a substantial larger appearance and is relatively out of scale compared to the existing structure. There are also concerns with the removal of the existing garage as this is a primary feature to the of the front elevation and it's original to the structure. The removal also prompts a new facade change to the existing structure creating a false sense of history as this indicates that there previously was a connection between all three roads and it's kind of storytelling in its place. Here we have a staff report excerpt regarding visual compatibility.

We The proposed relocation changes the position of the existing contributing residents front door slash facade to fully face North Dixie Boulevard. There are concerns with the modification as the contributing structure's original setting on the site faces North Swinton Avenue, where North Dixie and Northeast 5th Street originally intersected, which is important to the historic setting, as previously mentioned. Here is an excerpt regarding the visual compatibility, which discusses the concern about the windows and a substantially larger appearance. Here, we expressed concern regarding the overall size of the addition. While it is set behind the front wall plane, it's not located to the least public side of the building, particularly with the new relocation that's impacting the front facade appearance and the size of the proposed structure is substantial compared to the main mass of the district building.

And then, of course, those other elements that I

mentioned

previously. So, what the request is the relocation of the existing structure on the site. Here are some excerpts regarding recommended and not recommended approaches to relocating structures. Not recommended approaches include removing or relocating buildings or landscape features that may destroy the historic relationship between buildings and landscape in its setting. So there's concern that it imparts an unnecessary potential risk to the structure as the relocation is not for saving slash preserving the structure.

The relocation and orientation of the residents may have a negative effect on the historic integrity of the site, the structure in the Del Aida Prequistric District, while creating a false narrative of the history of the area, as this is a very clear indicator of how roads were previously laid out. So, going into the variance requests, the front the request is to the front setback where required 30 feet and they're proposing 22 foot six inches. This would be for the relocated structure along with the proposed addition. Here are the findings for the variance. So the existing structure as it is on the site, it's non conforming at 15.3 feet.

And their proposed front setback is 22 foot six where 30 feet is required. It will facilitate the construction of a one story addition within the front setback. This particular lot within the Del Ida Park Historic District is an indication that the roads were once connected and is reflected by the entrance of the subject property's orientation. While the variance would be allow an ability to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse and modernization of the strict structure, it could also be accomplished without relocating the structure within the setback or designing the new addition to encroach within them. The second request is to the site interior.

10 feet is required where a range of seven foot six to six foot five is proposed. Here are the variance findings again. So the existing site interior setback is 45 feet. And the proposed, as mentioned, is a range of six foot five to seven foot six. This would facilitate the relocation of the existing structure and rear modifications within the site interior setback. Due to the site's triangular shape, there are some constraints regarding setbacks. However, the existing structure is compliant with the site interior setback. So the proposed variance is not to preserve the existing structure's historic setting. The site does have special conditions and circumstances regarding requirements. It also has a special condition because of its historic setting and positioning on the site.

Structures being voluntarily relocated for the addition of more square footage and reorientation of the front of the structure. The site interior setback with new rear addition could accommodate the required setback as they are being movedconstructed at their requested location. Here are the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation with analyze the request. And the same here for the visual compatibility standards. And here are the certificate of appropriateness findings. And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Public comment. George. George

Long 46 North Swinton Avenue. Well, I'm gonna let you guys deal with the variances and the secretary's standard stuff like that. But when I see that house and that plan, I just wanna grab it and turn it. And I wanna tear off that old, original garage that's poking out there towards the street. Something needs to be done. That's really and also considering the fact that Dixie Highway was cut off and things like that, the whole thing is is hard to put back into original historic context. Thank you. Goodbye. Thank you.

Am I

allowed to speak? Michelle?

Of course.

Am I? Okay.

Okay. I'm Kim Dwyer and I live on the street and I am related to a board member so.

What's your address?

I live at 109 Dixie Boulevard. Okay. But I live on the street. I agree with George that I can't believe that garage is original, but you say it is because it looks like it's been tacked on. There's absolutely nothing of value to that garage. It's hideous. That's an opinion. I agree that the house looks like it needs to be turned. We live on Dixie Boulevard. We all love Dixie Boulevard and this house is just awkward.

The other thing I would ask that Rogers should pay attention to is the way you're doing the new driveway, for some reason, the city included think that the sidewalk is a pass through to get into the cul de sac and they drive their cars over the sidewalk and trucks with the landscape crew. So something needs to be done because it's you can even see where they race down the street and try to take off through there with somebody chasing them. So I love the idea of turning the house, making it part of the actual streetscape, and getting rid of the ugly garage.

What did I have in my head?

I think that's it. The only other thing I wanna comment on is I know that there was a letter sent in and I believe that I just can guess because I know everybody on the street. The house immediately to the next door to this did get a five foot variance to put their pool in, so there have been many variances given down this street. Olga Adler also got that's a beautiful beautiful historic project. She got variances for hers. So it's not it's not unusual for someone to on this street saving a house to get a variance. And I think that the house looks more historic and more original the way that Roger put it back together at the end there. I think

that was it. Okay. Thanks.

Thank you. Any rebuttal by the applicant, particularly with regard to some of the concerns expressed by the city?

Yes. There was a statement made that by the city that that by moving the house, it would be it would suffer or or be compromised in some sort of structural way. That's not it's is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? Absolutely not. Our house mover is Brownie Moving Company. They are extremely reputable. We've had to put engineering reports together. We've had to make we've had to do a lot of documentation.

We've we've done everything but crawl into the crawl space underneath the house. The house is built very well. That's the way they built things in 1937. This house is a prime candidate for being lifted and and and without any compromise whatsoever. You you could even make the argument that once it's put back down wherever it's going, it'll be it it it then, at that stage, has to be tied down for 2,025 codes.

So it'll be more secure in terms of windstorm type things. But so brownies moved everything at Sunny Village. Brownie's moved a house that you guys approved on Nassau Street. Brownie can move this house in his sleep without any compromise whatsoever. So should something happen during the move, we would call time out, meet with staff, have the chief building official come out and figure out what to do.

So I I you know, it's an interesting thing make moving a house. In this case, we're not moving it off-site. We're keeping it on-site. So that that helps in the degree of success that we're gonna have.

So Any other comments by staff that you

Not by staff. Not by staff. But the two emails that were sent to you, you guys should read your emails a little bit more frequently. I know it's tough. But we we we there were there were three variances given to our immediate next door neighbor.

One of which was a side yard building setback, two of which were pool related. Removing the two pool related variances, she was re she require she was requesting and was granted a side yard building setback reduction from 10 feet to eight feet. And not you guys, but a previous board, gave her that approval. Olga Adler at I think 19 North Dixie across the street.

I think Kelly's gonna tell us at this point that precedents are not Of

course they're not. They're not. They're absolutely not.

Absolutely not.

And you should take them into consideration on a case by case basis. But the two setback variances that we're requesting justifiable because we took the immediate block into consideration and we didn't just pull these two setbacks out of our proverbial rear end. So thank you. No other rebuttal to staff, staff did a great job.

I'm sorry did you close the comments from us? I didn't hear you close the

comments, I

had a comment.

Come on up.

Thank you.

Hi. I'm Tanya Olive. I live at 115 Dixie Boulevard. Have you

been sworn in, miss Olive?

I don't know how to do that. Giant.

You're about to learn.

So where are you in?

Well, I should

have been sworn in because

I built a house on the so I

know Tonight.

Gotta be

sworn in tonight.

Oh. I

had I have a comment, though, so she thinks

It it's just making sure you're you're just going under oath that your testimony is true today during the quasi judicial hearing.

And by the authority vested me, the notary of the state of Florida, do

you swear to affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes. Jesus. I wanted to speak to one of the issues that came up with the challenge to the actual modification of the house on the site and the question being that moving it or changing the location of the house on the side is somehow negates the historic or the history that the street used to run through to Swinton and that there was an intersection between Dixie and Swinton and what is that? 4 5th. Yeah.

And I I think that's I understand that. I think that we can all understand that that was something that was here beforehand, but they've actually changed the entire framework of the end of our street. And I think what should take precedence at this point and something that you might wanna consider is what that actually looks like at the end of the cul de sac. It does indeed look like a park. It does not in any way look like there was a street there.

And so I'm trying to maintain the idea that a street went through there and not recognizing that the the house as it exists right now and and the way it's it's tilted on the street makes it look like it doesn't even belong in the neighborhood. Like, it doesn't fit fit on on Swinton. Swinton. It It doesn't doesn't fit fit on the street behind us, and it doesn't fit on Dixie. And I think everybody on the street, there's a number of us here tonight, are so happy to see this being addressed because that area is often used by people parking illegally, trying to pick up people at the church, people running through the cul de sac itself, speeding through, going over that area.

And I think moving that house and recognizing that that street now ends there, even though it was historically, it went through to Swinton, it exists now. Okay. And we live on it, I and would like to see that street, I don't know, enclosed. And I think the house being moved and reoriented on the street would do that. So thank you very

much. Thank you.

I'm Robert Osunoff. I live at 101 Dixie Boulevard. While precedent is not a reason for doing something going forward, I understand that, but Dixie Boulevard has gone through, in many of the houses, a lot of challenges in order to respect the historical integrity of the house while the house being practical for the new users who would occupy the house. And I think that's the case here. I agree with Kim that I'm a little concerned about how the driveway will affect pedestrian use of the street.

But I think reorienting the street and having it join with the rest of the block is a very laudatory challenge. And I, you know, I definitely support it. I think that some of the things that are brought up and some of the more technical elements of it, as with many of the houses on the block, to we have to take into consideration the fact that this is to be used by somebody in 2025, not 1934. And I think that should be considered. Thank you.

Thank you. So let's go to the board.

Roger? I'll make it very brief. I'd just like the opportunity to rebut the final public comment. We're we don't understand necessarily the dynamics that they're describing on the concerns of the driveway, and we tried very hard not to have any negative impact on it. We're completely willing to to take whatever those concerns are into consideration and modify modify our driveway to still fit our needs and maybe resolve whatever it is that can help the neighborhood.

It the the drive is a little wider than it needs to be for a single family property, and we're willing to narrow it up or do whatever it might take to help in that regard. But we're presenting our project as drawn tonight. But in the future, we'll work to improve that driveway.

All right. Now let's go to the board.

I think staff has the ability

to cross and say them

under rebut.

Thank you. So a few notes. I want to thank miss Dwyer for bringing up and miss Olive, other neighbors bringing up the issue of landscape trucks crossing the grass. I wrote it down, it's definitely something that needs to be enforced. So we will look into that.

Perhaps there's a solution that the city can offer with respect to some kind of traffic calming device or something. So thank you so much for telling us that. With respect to mister Cope's rebuttal of staff, I don't wanna rebut rebut and go back and forth, but I do wanna make sure that I note anytime you have a relocation, there can be there can be concerns. Anytime you lift a building and remove it off its foundation. We're putting it in the staff report to note as we would with any relocation, and there is a bond that goes in place.

So that can if there is some kind of damage, there is a responsibility of the property owner and their construction team to immediately notify the chief building official. So it's more a matter of, you know, putting identifying this in the report so that you all know we acknowledge this and there's a process. But the secondary piece of what Ms. Hewitt was noting isn't solely limited to the concern of the building being damaged or integrity being damaged, it's the integrity of the contributing status that, you know, we've highlighted throughout the staff report that comes along with any move that happens. Some of our purists would say moving a building is absolutely not acceptable, but you know, now we're in a place where moving buildings is more acceptable and it's happening more frequently for sea level rise.

So they're concerned more about the integrity being affected as a result of the move is in concert with the addition. You know, the historic resource surveys happen every five to ten years where we reassess should a building remain as a contributor. And what we're concerned is that the proposal could result in this structure becoming a non contributor. So I just wanted to make that note and thank you so much.

Okay.

You're on.

Well, first of all, I wanna take credit for getting the street blocked off because at the rate of speed I used to drive through here in the eighties was appalling. So as a teenager, you take a right down Dixie coming off of Swinton and full speed. So I actually when they blocked it off, I was I was a little disappointed, but I completely understand why that happened.

But you did change your ways. Right?

Somewhat. I don't drive a '79 Dodge Magnum anymore. This one to me is really interesting. I do have some concerns with the variance on the east side. I think the relocation the the the site relocation is appropriate and I don't and I think the front setback is appropriate.

It it doesn't it's well within the it's a non compliant structure now as regards to the front setback. So I think this is a creative take on it. I do have a concern on the east variance. I don't have a concern on the Northwest variance as much. I like the fact that the overall stature, the overall height is relatively modest.

It's roughly the same as it is now. I do like the fact that they're saving for the most part the front of most of the original facade. I'm a little concerned about the garage that's being removed there, and that is going to change the overall look of the front facade. But I understand completely why that's being done as well and that's for us to discuss. In the grand scheme of things, I think the majority of what's being proposed is very appropriate but I think we need to talk about a couple of the details here.

I think the secondary or the addition is going to be clearly differentiated from original structure in terms of architecture scale. But it's again, it's kind of a strange lot there and I don't think that because it faced Swinton at one point, and Swinton was open to to Dixie is a good enough reason not to allow an internal move on the site. So I just like to hear what everybody else is saying.

Okay. Chris? Let's go.

Overall, think the composition of the design is very nice, and it it fits into the standards of what I what I think they go for is to have a structure that feels like it's part of the structure, but you can clearly see that it's something that's been added to. It was mentioned the windows were concerned by staff, and I can see that. They are much larger. By having that pane above the the window, it it just adds a you know, in the elevations, it's white and then black, right, the window. So I I wonder if there was a rendering that would have been helpful to see.

But since we don't have it, I'm I'm noticing the large windows. And it it does that is a big change, and that does feel like it doesn't fit the overall character. But the height of the the roofline, the the other styles does fit. So that's one concern I have about the window size. The variances.

It was interesting. I had one idea before then then I got the emails that I I didn't get in my in my email so I had to read it here. The neighbor to the east has a concern about the the reduced setback. And just looking the aerial, that property is much smaller than this one. So I'm not gonna speculate to why a variance was given for that property because that's what it says in this letter, and I'm gonna I'm gonna think that that's correct.

So I do have a concern about this larger property having to push to to that side just in, you know, hearing the neighbor's concern. John said he wasn't so concerned with the variance to to Dixie. And I wonder if other properties are also closer so it just creates a consistent sort of look. I'm okay with the garage being removed. It does look like that.

It just seems like it doesn't fit. So I think it actually is an improvement to take it off. Maybe it could have been a carport or something else. Maybe that would have looked like a more historic element. That wasn't proposed, so I can only imagine what that would have been like. So the two concerns are the windows and the eastern variants.

Peter? Yes. Overall, I have a vested interest since I live on the street, so I'm in favor of the project's concept. I think turning the house makes a lot of sense. The variances, well the one on Dixie is actually an improvement. Think we're Peter,

I just

want to

stop you for a second, but you just said vested interest so I just want to make sure you don't think that there's any financial or special interest that you have in this property moving

That's wrong choice of words. Okay.

A personal I interest figured but I just

from an aesthetic standpoint having lived on the street for a long time. It's nice to see the improvements going forward. So I'm in support of the variances. I'm also in support of the turning of the structure and the addition. I think it's a modest addition.

It's I think 2,200 square feet that's being added to the structure, if that's correct. And a pool is a great idea so there's a lot to fit in this site for a modern family with two kids and would be a nice addition to the neighborhood. I'm struggling with the transom windows a little bit on the addition. It would be nice to have a rendering without them just to see how it fits in, but it it does distinguish the new structure from the old very clearly. So I I'm in support overall, but the windows are interesting. Thank you.

You know, I I also struggle a little bit with the variance next to the neighbor, and the windows are a concern. But the the front of the house and I think moving moving the structure makes a whole lot of sense. The the existing the the situation with the streets is different today than it was then. That house wouldn't have been built the way it was built if the streets had been like they are today. My biggest concern is that the front exterior of the house, to me, looks nothing like the original structure.

I think it it loses the the the feel and the and the integrity of what the original structure was. One of the speakers said something about an ugly garage, and I think you're right. It's an ugly garage, but it but it is it was a significant part of the exterior of that house. I'm not sure that I can, in my role on this board, remove it because I think it's ugly. I think that my consideration has to be, are we maintaining integrity of what was originally there?

And if the garage was part of that original structure, I I have some issue with with removing it. Maybe there's a way to do a homage of some way to that original garage that doesn't exist in the drawings today that maybe something could be done to at least reflect what the original structure looked like.

Along those

lines, the new construction there, which I guess is to the east, does have sort of an homage to the garage in terms of the slanted roof. Okay. So maybe that could be highlighted that could be moved forward or something to to do that. My concern is if you the secretary of interior guidelines talk about secondary and subordinate when adding a new construction. And this to me looks like it's hiding the historic portion and really not in any way secondary and subordinate with the new.

I think that's partly the height, that's partly the scale. The the windows are, to my eye at least, very different to the windows that were there even if you strip away the the shutter part of it. So that's my concern. And I am also a little bit concerned about that side variance. So Roger, could you just address that a little bit, particularly the secondary subordinate?

While he's getting up here, a rendering, a proportional rendering, I think would have helped here to kinda see what you see when you come down. But I'm assuming the roof peak on the original structure is probably more forward towards the street than the roof peak of the secondary. Yes. It is.

But was was I correct in that the roof peak of the new construction is actually higher? Few inches higher. Few inches?