Historic and Environmental Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

Thank you. you Thank you. you Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you.

you

Thank you. Thank you.

Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. I ask everyone to please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing to be sworn in by staff.

If you intend to testify in this proceeding, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give will be the truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you. You may be seated.

Two things. Please check your phones to make sure they are on do not disturb or mute. And then we'll have a note from our city attorney regarding lobbying. Surprise. Surprise.

Any person who is a lobbyist pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 6 of the City Code must register with the city clerk and comply with related city requirements for lobbyists before appearing before the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. A person may not lobby a city official, board member, or staff member until registering. A copy of the code section by lobbyists is available in the city clerk's office and online on munico.com. The agenda for this meeting and the materials for items on the agenda were published and made available to the board in advance of the meeting. The materials are also available online at miamigov.com. Please silence all cell phones and other noise-making devices. Any person with a disability requiring assistance, auxiliary aids, or services for this meeting may notify the board liaison. Any person may be heard by the board through the chair and pursuant to the published notice for not more than two minutes on any proposition before the board unless modified by the chair. When addressing the board, the member of the public must first state his or her name, address, and what item will be spoken about. when the board takes action or votes on any proposition shall do so by a roll call vote to be recorded and included in the record thank you thank you very much are there any requests for absence waivers yes member hugh ryan requested an absence waiver we have a roll call please yes calling chair william hopper here

Calling Vice Chair Luis Prieto-Munoz. Calling Member Najeeb Campbell.

Here.

Calling Member Christopher Cauley.

Here.

Calling Member Elvis Fuentes. Calling Member Julie Odell. Here. Calling Member John Perez.

Here.

Calling Member Robert Powers. Here. Calling Member Jordan Trachtenberg. And calling Member Hugh Ryan. We do have Cora.

Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the absence waiver? Motion. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any questions on the motion? All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Thank you. All opposed? Motion carries. Does everyone have a chance to review the minutes for January, March, and April of this year? If so, is there a motion to adopt the minutes as presented? Or are there any additions or corrections to the minutes? Motion to approve. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Motion and second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Okay, I think we're ready for the HEP discussion items.

There are no discussion items at this time. How about monthly updates? So there are two quick monthly updates. As you'll notice, there's a new face sitting on the dais with us. Mr. James Jackson will be joining this board as the attorney for the board. Mr. James Jackson will be joining us as the board attorney.

Welcome.

I do want to also note that the position for preservation planner has closed and we're currently coordinating interviews for that position at this time.

Now we'll move on to the regular agenda. Are there any changes asked for in the agenda order?

There are two requests to change the agenda. The first request is staff is requesting that item number two be deferred until next month. The other request is the applicant has requested item number one be moved to later in the agenda to replace item number seven at the end of the HEP section.

Okay, let's take the second one first. Is there any objection on the board to moving item number one to item number seven?

Is that on the consent agenda?

No, it's the HEP items. Yes, thank you for clarifying.

Okay, so ordered. The second one is for a deferral on item number two. Is there anyone in the public who wish to speak on item number two, whether or not to defer it to next month? Not on the merits of the case, just whether it's to be deferred to next month. Any objection from the board? Is there a motion to defer item number two to next month?

Motion to defer.

Second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries. So it is deferred until next month. Now we'll move into the new thing on the agenda, which is the resolutions or the consent agenda.

PEP item under consent agenda number one, file ID 19165, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to article section 77.2.6, subsection E2, and article four, table 12, the zoning ordinance of the city of Miami, Florida, as amended Miami 21 code recommending approval or denial to the Miami Planning Zoning Board for an exception to Miami 21 code to allow for the reestablishment of a non-conforming office for a property located approximately at 6621 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, 33138, as more particularly described in the attached and incorporated Exhibit A. I believe this item they wanted to vote together. Have them vote together?

Yes, both items on the consent agenda should be read.

Okay. That's consent agenda item number two. File ID 19166, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to Article 7, Section 7.2.6, Subsection E2 in Article 4, Table 12. The zoning ordinance of the city of Miami, Florida as amended Miami 21 code recommending approval or denial to the Miami Planning and Zoning Board for an exception to Miami 21 code to allow for the reestablishment of a non-conforming commercial and storage use for a property located approximately at 45 Northwest 31st Street, Miami, Florida 33127 is more particularly described in the attached and incorporated exhibit A.

Thank you. Before you start, maybe you can give us a little introduction in what we're doing. Sure.

So we have introduced a consent agenda. We discussed it a little bit at the end of your last meeting. But the purpose of the consent agenda and why it's timely at this time is because as your agendas become denser and more intense, The items that are recommended approval by staff that are considered non-controversial are types of items that can be grouped together and is what you'll see today. We've kind of put those on a consent agenda saying we don't feel that you need to have discussion about it. What we'll do is we'll enter into the record our staff report because our staff report is the legal background to that case. there's somebody here in the public that would like to speak of course you can remove the item for the consent agenda and have a full public hearing on it if you would like to specifically see a full presentation you can ask for an item to be removed from the consent agenda and so that way that we can move some of our our less controversial items that are have staff recommendation of approval that are pretty straightforward we can move those through the process a little faster, allowing you guys to spend your time on the cases that really need your expertise and your guidance, as well as a little bit more diligence on them. So the two items that are in your consent agenda today are actually items where you're making a recommendation to the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board. So about 18 months ago, there was a new exception written into Miami 21. This exception is specifically to allow for the better adaptive reuse of historic buildings or buildings that are 50 years old or older. And that is to allow those buildings that were clearly intended and built for a use, where they're no longer zoned for that use. So for example, in the first case that you're seeing today, The front half of the, this is an office building. It's always been an office building. It's been an office building for decades upon decades. It exists in the MIMO Historic District. The front part of it is zone T5 and can have that use. The back half is zone T3. And so it creates issues when they go to get their certificate of use. And so this just allows them to be able to use the whole building for its original intended use, which is office. It's always been office. And we've done that research and that's what that staff report has in it. The other one is an old flower warehouse space where the building is again now zone T3 but historically it has existed for more than 50 years as a warehouse space with some type of retail component. Historically it was a flower shop originally when it was originally built. So again allowing that warehouse site back to with a small retail component to it going back to its original use And so this just allows these buildings to be used for what they were originally built for. Again, you're making a recommendation to the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board, and then they ultimately make the exception. That exception can be appealed to City Commission if somebody chooses to appeal it. But those are the two cases. They're recommended for staff approval. The research on these is pretty straightforward, so. That's why we're recommending approval on them.

Thank you, and we're taking those as a single item, a single vote, is that correct?

You can take a single vote on consent item agendas, on all items on the agenda.

We need to first agree to hear them as consent items?

Yes, and then to also accept the staff reports into the record for them.

So is it the pleasure of the board to accept these as under the consent agenda? Do we need a motion for that?

No.

Does anyone object? No objection, okay. And you want to enter the staff report into the record?

I request that the staff analysis be accepted into the records.

Proposed items one and two.

Thank you. The first exception is 661, 21 Biscayne Boulevard. Section 7262, City of Miami Ordinance. The applicant is requesting a recommendation to the Planning and Signing Board on the exception to permit a non-conforming office use at 66621 Biscayne Boulevard. The non-conforming office use is a building that currently has a general commercial uses. The building right now is in T3 transit zone where the office is prohibited and is permitted by T5 transit zone. The property is located within Maimo Historic District along with Biscayne Boulevard corridor which include T5, 6 and 5 and 6 zones where office use is permitted by right and is prohibited in T4. The proposed office use is compatible with the surrounding context and the structure is a non-contributive building that is approximately 89 years old. Also, microfilm records demonstrate that the office is a commercial use, the commercial use as existing within the building, supporting that the structure has historically been utilized for such purposes.

Could you go back a slide before you go on? I can just let you know which building that is.

Okay. 6221 Biscayne Boulevard. It's the one in the blue square. Okay. Okay. In conclusion, given the building age, the historical uses, including commercial and office, and by the microphone records. The bifurcate zoning classification and its location with the corridor characterized by more intensive commercial office uses. The request exception is consistent with the intent of the section 7262. The proposed office use represent continuation of historic established uses and can be considered compatible with the present context. A recommendation pursuant to section 7262 of the CD of code, the planning department recommends approval.

Okay, and the second one?

The second one.

Since we're hearing them both together.

The second one is a property request that staff analysis be accepted into the records?

Yes. Okay.

The second is a 45 Northwest 31th Street. The section is to permit the non-conforming commercial storage use of the property. The building is a T4 transit zone. The structure is a one-story commercial warehouse constructed in 1937. It's approximately 89 years old. Gabriel.

You can just abbreviate. Just abbreviate. You can just abbreviate. You don't need to go through the whole staff analysis. Okay.

Okay. Well, they are building, as I said, it's a nine-year-old. It's a Proxima 25, 26-classing zone, commercial uses. THE CONCLUSION IS GIVEN THAT THE BUILDING MEETS THE REQUIREMENT, THE PROPOSED USE ALIGNS WITH THE COMMUNITY VISION. WE REQUEST THE ADJECTION TO BE APPROVED.

THANK YOU. HAVING SEEN AND HEARD, SEEN THE BUILDINGS AND HEARD THE STAFF REPORT, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION? I'll make a motion to approve. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Is there a motion and a second? Any discussion on the motion? Separate roll call, please.

Calling Member Chris Cawley.

Yes.

Thank you. Calling Member Najeeb Campbell. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member Julie O'Dell. Yes. Calling Member John S. Perez.

Yes.

Thank you. And calling Chair William Hopper. Yes. Thank you. This, I'm sorry, and also calling Member Robert Powers.

Yes.

Sorry, this passes by a vote of six to zero.

And I make food for you.

Thank you very much. Okay, we'll now move on to the regular agenda. Staff will announce the The applicant or the appellant will come forward, give your name and address for the record, and we'll have the staff report after which the applicant or appellant may respond with a 10 minute presentation if needed. at the end of which we will open up to the public for comments. Please limit your comments to two minutes or less. When everyone has had a chance to speak, we'll close the public hearing and leave it to the board to discuss among themselves, ask questions, and then take a motion and vote. So we'll start, I believe, with HEP item number three.

And also, Chair, may we close the online public comment?

Yes.

Thank you.

Calling HEP item number three, file ID 19168, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2. subsection B4 of the City Code of Ordinances, approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit the installation of an asphalt shingle roof to a contributing structure within the Palm Grove Historic District, located approximately at 536 Northeast 65th Street, Miami, Florida, 33138, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report, entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Thank you. Before you start, here's the question from the public. I'm sorry, I can't hear you.

The first item is going to be delayed in the hearing, yes.

Until number seven.

Yes, yes.

Please, you have to use the microphone so that you can be heard.

This is the fifth time I'm coming to speak about this one issue. And I had to take my children out of school for this. This is the fifth time I'm coming to speak about this issue. I feel like I know you guys very well already, and it's becoming borderline abusive. I've had to take my children out of school to come here, and now because is the owner even here for the property? I don't think so. I clearly care more about this project than they do, and I'm going to have to sit with my kids here until the seventh issue? That's really abusive to me.

I'm sorry, would you give your name and address for the radio?

My name is Andrea Dreyfus, 679 Northeast 58th Street. I'm adjacent to this project.

Right. Thank you.

I can't stay here until 7. Not 7 o'clock. No, no, until the 7th issue with my kids. I mean, they're 8. I can't do that to them. I don't understand why it's so late.

I'm sorry, but you should have brought that up when you asked if there was a contingent.

I really didn't understand it. I'm not familiar with this process. I couldn't understand. It's not very clear, and I don't understand. I mean, this is not what I do for a living.

I understand.

And I feel like this whole system is being taken advantage of. They're trying to wear us down, and it's really abusive.

I don't disagree with you. However, we had made the modification to the agenda at the beginning, and that's when we could have.

But the agenda wasn't even up. We couldn't even see what it was. I didn't even know what you were speaking of. I couldn't tell if it was the first issue with that gentleman came up from the planning department or another one. It just wasn't clear. I don't think I'm the only person who wasn't clear what was getting deferred till an indefinite date and deferred till the end of the meeting.

I understand.

I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable to make an exception to at least allow me to speak. I have my kids here. They're missing their activities. I took them out of school again.

So it's at the chair's discretion. You could potentially hear the case and then table it to the end. to allow the applicant to talk at the end. If you want it to table the item.

If they resolve their issue by that time? That's correct.

Okay. Again, it's at your discretion.

Mr. Chair? Since it's my discretion, I'm going to ask the applicants for number three to wait so we can hear the public comments for item number seven, which was number one.

She's here for item one.

I know that. That's what I'm doing.

If we can have item, Melanie, if you can read item one into the record, and then we'll do the staff report. We can then take public comment and then table it for the applicant's presentation.

Item number one in the regular agenda, file ID 17321, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. PURSUANT TO SECTION 23-6.2, SUBSECTION B4 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, APPROVING OR DENYING A SPECIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO PERMIT NEW CONSTRUCTION AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A VACANT LOT WITHIN THE MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT, LOCATED APPROXIMATELY AT 5810 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33137. FURTHER INCORPORATING THE ANALYSIS IN THE ATTACHED STAFF REPORT. entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

So what we'll do is we'll have the staff report, then we'll have public comment, and then we'll table the motion until, I mean we'll table the item until the applicant comes back.

Okay.

Okay?

Understood.

So you're up.

Okay. I'm Karina Gonzalez de Mendoza, Historic Preservation Planner. I request that the staff analysis be accepted into the record. Yes. Okay, so the property 5810 North Bayshore Drive is currently a vacant lot. It has been unimproved within the Morningside area. The historic photos that we have here are the two abutting properties, 714 Northeast 59th Street, which is north of the vacant lot, and 679 Northeast 58th Street, which is west of the vacant lot. These three properties share a historic wall that is along the perimeter of it. So as we go here, the existing is a collection of trees surrounded by this historic wall. The new proposal, as this property was previously seen in November, since then the applicant has returned with a different design. So the new proposed design is more sympathetic to the Morningside Historic District, making significant design changes that answered many of the comments that were submitted by the board in order to bring a new design that would better fit the Morningside Historic District. If we...

Go to the next.

So one of the examples of the site plan that we have here, one of the concerns had been the setback that had previously been submitted. They increased the setback to better reflect what is seen throughout the neighborhood, throughout the historic district and along the block face specifically.

So we go to the next slide, please.

The proposed elevations, this is just to contrast the previous design that had been submitted to the current proposal. The current design is more Mediterranean Revival style to be a little, to be more sympathetic to the district. So rather than many of those horizontal lines that were seen previously, they're introducing arched window ways, terraces, and cornice details. So this is one of the, this is the other public right of way facing, side. So we see some of the other concerns that they took into the design is the board had highlighted making a more regular fenestration pattern on the second floor. So while Submitting a completely new design, they did take that into account, making more regular fenestration pattern along this other, along this elevation that is visible from the plug right away, as well as altering the garage doors to be a lighter color to better complement the district and the property.

As we go to the next.

These are some of the other elevations. They are not immediately visible from the public right of way, but they still show how the design ties together even into the backyard to bringing forward all of the Open windows and archways. To bring together a cohesive design. So the materials are also in line with the Morningside Historic District, incorporating many of the colors that we see throughout, as well as many of the actual textures and materials that we see. Per the letter of intent, the historic wall will remain and be restored. For the planting plan that had been submitted, wild coffee would be shown inside the wall versus hedges that had previously been submitted, and many of the other changes that had been submitted by the board. So there has been considerable design change in this to meet previous comments that were submitted. So with this, staff recommends approval with conditions. The conditions are the usual ones that we typically submit, developing in accordance with the plan submitted and submitting all those necessary documents for glass to be clear and resolution to be included. The conditions we do want to highlight is that the historic wall at the front of the property line shall remain. Any new gates or entrances shall reflect the pattern of the metal work on the corner of the historic wall and comply with the historic design guidelines, which will be approvable by staff on the staff level. We also request for approval by the HEP board. We do want to highlight that approval by the HEP board does not negate nor supersede any existing easements or rights of the property. So should the plans change in deference to the easement, the applicant may be required to return to the board for review and approval. And in the case of any discrepancies between elevation drawings and renderings, the drawings shall supersede the renderings. And with this, that the applicant will comply with all requirements as necessary. Thank you.

Okay, we'll pause here for the response from the applicant, unless you have power of returning it. Okay, we'll come back to you. So we'll have now comments from the members of the public. Please come to the podium, give your name and address for the record. And limit your comments to two minutes or less.

All right, my name is Andrea Dreyfus. I live at 679 Northeast 58th Street. And first of all. Okay, Andrea Dreyfus, 679 Northeast 58th Street. adjacent you saw a picture of my house there um first of all i do want to say i do appreciate the redesign of the project i think it's a lot more appropriate to the neighborhood um my concern also is a concern i share with mr pollock who has also been attending these meetings but is working right now is the view on 58th street i understand you totally have the right to make the entrance to your house on Bayshore, but the entrance to all of our houses on 58th Street. And it's just very, very plain. We would appreciate if it was a little bit, a little bit more attention was paid to 58th Street, being that's the frontage for a lot of those homes. So just very minor. And just a concern that we also have is there's a lot of extremely large trees. We're talking 40 to 60 foot royal palms. throughout that property, probably about 30 trees. So we are a little bit concerned as to what's going to happen to all these trees. Are they going to be moved? Are they just going to be killed? You know, it is a concern for us in this community. So we do appreciate the changes, but we would just appreciate a little bit more attention paid to the design on 58th Street. Thank you.

Anyone else? Yes, sir.

Hello. Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street in the beautiful Morningside neighborhood. So as Ms. Dreyfus said, this is about the fourth or fifth time that we've been here. And you may recall initially the design was ultra modern. The neighbors strongly felt was not compatible with a historic district whose period of significance was before World War II. And the architect, I believe he's here. Could you raise your hand, sir? Can I see him here? There he is. Thank you. Thank you so much for this design. This is a thousand percent improvement over the previous, the Mediterranean Revival style. It is articulated both vertically and horizontally. The covered porch flanked by pilasters. And above it is an entablature, cornice molding, and the tower rising above a pitched terracotta roof. It has a chimney, which means there's a fireplace. That's a wonderful addition. Multiple balconies, columns. It appears to be a Corinthian column. buttresses, the front steps have wings with tiled risers, the arched windows, they have mullions, muntins, and sills, and there's even a built-in tray-paneled planter box atop a flared bracket. So thank you for putting all that wonderful ornamental detail into this design. I do have a point I'd like to clarify. The city staff recommended a setback of 25 feet on 58th Street. I see that has been incorporated. Thank you again, but I just want to make sure because on that same page in the plans, it shows 20 feet. as the provided setback. Is it actually 25? It is, okay. For the record, the gentleman is indicating that it'll be 25 feet. And then the last item is the south facade. The windows are very regular and uniform, and I'm hoping that perhaps you might consider changing that so perhaps you have a double window here or there, perhaps an arched window so that it's not quite as plain. Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? If not, we'll close the public hearing and put this on pause until we come back to the applicant. And now we'll go back to item number three, sorry, which does not have to be re-announced.

at file number three, file ID 19168 for the address at 536 Northeast 65th Street.

Sorry for the delay. Please give your name and address for the record.

Hi, good afternoon. Genesis Najera, 536 Northeast 65th Street.

Thank you.

We'll start with the staff report.

Karina Gonzalez de Mendoza, Historic Preservation Planner, requested the staff analysis be accepted into the record.

Yes.

So the applicant's request is to allow for an asphalt shingle re-roofing of this contributing structure. This is within the Palm Grove Historic District. Per the historic photo, we can see a flat tile, as well as on the historic tax card, the roof material is indicated as shingle cement, which is what they would have referred to flat tiles as with these historic tax cards. So that's just established as a historic material, the flat tiles. With the survey of this specific, with the survey of this house in 2007, for its 2009 designation, it did have a shingle roof. As well as for the resurvey in 2016, it did have a shingle roof similar to, if not the actual same roof that it has right now. And with that shingle roof, it was designated as a contributing structure. So currently, the house does look very similar to the historic photo that we have on hand. The primary changes are the windows that have been changed over the years, as well as the roof to the more common asphalt shingle roof. The color that they're submitting matches those of the rest of the neighborhood. The proposed undertaking is not consistent with the City of Miami historic design guidelines, as it does not match the historic material, as we said before. However, with the survey and the re-survey, the house was still deemed a contributing structure, suggesting that the roof may not be architecturally defining of it. But as it does not align with the historic design guidelines, staff recommends denial of the request. However, should the board approve by their own determination, we do recommend some of our standard conditions of developing in accordance with the plan submitted and that the resolution be submitted with the building permit, as well as the brochure of colors and to comply with requirements.

Okay, thank you. Anything you'd like to add to the staff report?

Yes. I'm speaking on behalf of my mom and my dad and their donor, Beatriz Najera and Jose Najera. This property has shingle roof since 1992, and we have addresses around the area that also have shingle roof. We also had an engineer evaluate the property. He explained that the current structure that does not seem designed for tire roofing installation style will require major structural change. We do have that. I think we submitted also that to the inspection report. So For this reason, we're respectfully requesting approval to keep a shingle roof since it matches the existing structure that the history of the home is and more practical for the property. So that's all. My parents, they're retired. They can't afford already, you know, if they don't accept shingle roof to do tile, it's more expensive. And yeah, that's why we're here today to see if we could get approval for a shingle. Thank you for your time. Okay.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Yes, sir.

Elvis Cruz, 631 Northeast 57th Street. Board members, we've seen this movie many times before, and in this neighborhood specifically, and again, regarding asphalt single versus the concrete tile on the roof. The main reason people want to avoid the tile is to save money. But the reality is you actually save money in the long run by going with the tile. An asphalt single roof does not have anywhere near the lifespan that a tile roof would have. especially if you get your roofer to put on one or two extra layers of that peel and stick that they use nowadays as the underlayment. So I would ask you to please uphold the historic integrity of the neighborhood, require the tile, and it'll be for the House's benefit, but it'll also be for your economic benefit in the long run. You may not realize it now, but in the long run, you will save money doing that. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on this item?

Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions or comments. Beginning with Mr. Powers.

Good afternoon. So there's a grant program that you can go apply for, specifically for your parents. It's designed specifically for people over a certain age in historic districts. That can give them a very, very, it'll be almost a, The price should be agreeable with them. And I just think that you need to go through that grant program. That neighborhood has changed, as you know, so drastically in the last 25 years. And it is now the largest historic district in the city. I know your house because I live on 66th Street, so I know right where that house is on the other side. I'm not trying to make your life difficult, but I'm just going to tell you something. Mr. Cruz is correct. If they can afford to put a concrete tile roof on that house, that's a 30-year to 40-year lifespan. With a tile roof. I replaced mine just a couple years ago. And that was that roof that was on there for 75 years on my house. That was the original roof when they built that house in 1947 as a concrete roof so i think you should work with staff personally and go through the grant program to get a grant to put the proper historical roof on that house just for the longevity and to protect them because they've got the shutters they have the shutters that you pull over the windows The other thing that's available to them is windows are also available through a grant process as well. So I'm just saying, like if you have to do this, do it right and do it something that they won't ever have to worry about again in their lifetime, honest to God. and and we have a whole program to help you through that uh that's all i have to say but i i think that you should apply for that uh you're in the perfect uh position to do so and no doubt will probably get granted to you so unless do you have any questions for me is it okay is it okay if i translate to my mom absolutely

Just to answer the recommendation, currently with the grant program, we are between cycles. We don't have a projected date yet as for when the next cycle will begin of accepting applications.

Okay.

I mean, it will most likely be next year. So it will be some time.

Yeah, we've been waiting since September to do the roof, and when we came across that now, you know, it's considered historical. It's only a specific type of material it could be. Until now, you know, we have the court hearing because we had a way and everything. We had an engineering, like, to try to see, and they said based on the duplex, like, tile roof would be a lot.

Like, how do I explain this? Yeah.

That the tile is not capacity for the tile, it's a duplex. So we had an engineer review it and everything, and they prefer shingle, like my parents.

Ms. O'Dell?

So next year is when the grant program is going to be open again?

Yes, so we just closed the grant program, and we have issued 10 recipient grants. We're working through having that work completed. If there is money left over, then we have a waiting list that we'll go into. And then next year, if we have, we should have additional funds and or leftover funds will open up a new cycle for applications that will mirror what we've done this year. So it won't open until January.

That's a whole other year. And it's already, the roof is leaking. My mom already paid $1,600 for somebody to go and try to patch it up and still nothing. So if we couldn't, you know, they prefer shingle. That's what they could afford. We're doing financing. We're going to try as much as we can to pay it off as soon as possible to avoid interest. But

Thank you. How long have your parents lived there? 1992. So 34 years.

Yes, thanks a lot for being here. Sorry that your roof is leaking. So did you guys, were you able to check the cost of the tile roof? I understand that the engineer said it's not, you have an engineer that said they didn't think the structure could accommodate the tile roof. Understood. And that was great. great that you looked into that. With that said, just out of curiosity, did that come about as part of a process of you researching how much it would cost to put the tile roof on the structure? Like, did you look into that?

No, sir.

And... and i noticed in the staff report that it mentioned that the roof because of the shallow roof line it's very hard to see i mean the the staff report seems a little bit at first i was reading it and i thought it was going to say in this particular case maybe the proposed roofing material would be acceptable as i get deeper into it it says well it's not consistent with what typically happens so i guess just from a common sense point of view Will the roof be very visible to everybody in the neighborhood? Because it looks like really shallow and.

It's very shallow and it is on the second floor because according to the guidelines, that's the reason why we have to recommend denial. It is considered a contributing structure. So because it's considered contributing and the only changes, the changes that were made were the roof and the windows, it suggests that perhaps the roof is not necessarily a defining architectural aspect of the house. So that was part of the argument. But again, per the guidelines, they do list that it should be the historic material.

Okay, thank you. And so this is primarily just for the roof, correct? This has nothing to do with the windows. So I mean, from my point of view, I wish there was a middle ground that we could find in a scenario like this. If somebody's roof is completely leaking, the grant application process is not available. I don't know how we've done that before in certain scenarios, if it was a cost thing and there was a real hardship for that. And so I understand the value of maintaining the historic Guidelines, but I would hate to see this family. Suffer and not be able to have a roof. They physically can't afford it.

So those are my cells right now if if I made through the chair. Um, Generally, when someone claims, and there are specifications within Chapter 23 about specifically claiming an economic hardship. I think one of the reasons why we don't see them that often is because it is invasive, right? You are expressing to the public in a public meeting your economic hardship. That aside, what has, what I've seen the history be, because I have not dealt with one while I'm here, but what I've seen the history of that is, is generally when someone proves to the board that there is in fact an economic hardship, the board tends to allow The roof of that particular type with a condition that it will not be allowed in the future again right so that just so the In case you're not privy to that history. I have not been but that is what I've seen been approved previously by this board Okay, thanks Kenneth.

Did you understand what our historic preservation officer was mentioning? It's a very tricky thing because It's a private Decision you know why you may have to do one thing versus another But there have been times in the past when we've made an exception If it was a cost factor And I just wanted that out there Those are my points of view especially since the roof is not very not especially since that but the roof is not even very visible So those are all my questions for now. Thank you Kenneth, and thank you very much

Question for staff. Have you interacted with this applicant before? Or is it the first time here today?

This is the first time that they've been here. I was the one who's been interacting with them through the process.

You have? Okay. Did you offer them the, or did you mention economic hardship to staff and did you offer it to them?

At the time that we were going through the process, the grant program application window was open at the time. They did review it and think about it for a time. They decided that it didn't fit their needs. They can correct me if I'm wrong. I also showed them the section of the code that talked about economic hardship and what would be required to demonstrate that to the board. As Mr. Kalmas said, it is invasive to be opening up your books like that to the public record. So I imagine that that may be the reason as to why they also turned down that option as well.

Is there a specific reason why you didn't go for the grant or the economic hardship route?

Okay.

So the reason why my parents didn't proceed for us to apply for the grant is because since we already got a report from the engineering that it wasn't capable for it to be tile and for it to be shingle, we didn't agree to do the grant since we already have a company that's representing us.

And then financial too.

okay did you receive the letter from the engineer previous to communicating with staff or post we got the notification from the engineering before so mr campbell would you like to see the engineering report yes Was this engineering report given to you to staff to analyze?

Yes, it was part of the submittal. I don't believe it was included in the staff analysis, though.

Okay. Is there an issue with the report? The reason why I'm asking is because I'm trying to read simultaneously as I'm speaking to you, but if the inspection report claims that the roof cannot handle concrete tiles and they submitted that to you, did you find an issue with this engineer's report to then still recommend concrete tiles anyway?

So, I mean, the standard hasn't changed, right? So the standard is that the original roof material is required to go back on as per the standards and guidelines. So the engineer report is something that you can take into consideration, But as per the standards and guidelines, we would, or essentially not us as HEP, but essentially once they got into permitting, then that would be, those additional requirements to support the roof would be required as part of the permitting then. So at the end of the day, the standard for us has not changed.

Okay.

Now, if you would like to take it, we don't, there's no, we don't find fault or issue with the report. But if you would like to take that into some into consideration as part of your determination, you can, you can do that.

I noticed that it is included with the associated documents. If it's dated November 26 2025. Yeah.

So you're saying if, let's say the engineering report is completely accurate, they go ahead and start to install the concrete tiles and the roof collapses under the weight. You're saying that the permitting process previously installing the concrete tiles would prevent that from happening because the permitting process would say, well, you need to improve this rafter or that rafter. So therefore, it would be okay. Is that the stance?

I imagine that is how typically the permitting process goes. So, I mean, they would turn in for a new roof if there would be an inspection. And so those things are typically caught during that inspection period.

Okay. Was that clear to your parents that when staff saw the incident report, they said, well, permitting would be able to take care of that situation if you need to strengthen your roof. Did you understand that? Or did your parents understand that?

Sorry, repeat that again, sir, so I could translate.

Okay. I'm going somewhere with this, all right? Because your parents did not accept, did not attempt to do the economic hardship or the grant. Two avenues. Said, no, we don't need that. And you relied on this. So upon presenting this to staff, staff is now saying, well, this may be accurate, but your rules can be strengthened through the permitting process to then receive the concrete ties. I'm wondering if your parents understood that.

. . .

So, espero que se entendió de que sí dependemos de una carta. Dependiendo de lo que la carta dijo y eso es lo que estaba antes de que uno se mudara también.

Sorry. So what my mom understood, like, you know, I was translating to her that, yes, we denied, like, to not apply for a grant and then also the hardship. But, yeah, we depended on what the engineering was saying, that it was single roof. And she said ever before moving in, 19 before Andrew? And before Andrew, they saw shingles, so that's what they wanted to continue with the shingle roof. I don't know if that was answering your question. I'm sorry.

Kind of, yes. Do your parents understand they're in a historic district? They accept and understand this?

If they understand what exactly you're saying?

The house is a contributing structure in a historic district. When they moved in and as their subsequent life, did they understand this?

Mm-hmm. Dice que si entiende de como...

Through the chair? Yes, sir. The other thing also, just to give you more information, I just got a text from Commissioner District 5. They have money for people over 65 to apply for that money to do their roof. Just send it to me, just this minute. Thanks. Just letting you know. And the house next door has a tile roof on it, and it's the same house. Please speak into the microphone.

Mr. Campbell, did you have additional questions?

Mr. Campbell, did you have it?

Well, the question was, did your parents understand when they purchased? I'm not sure if it was at this historic district when they purchased.

When they bought the house in 1992 or 1991, it was not historic. The Palm Grove neighborhood was surveyed in 2007, 2008 for their designation in 2009.

Okay. Were they aware when it became that there are no part of a historic district? Were they aware of this or is it just a surprise when the roof work came?

She wasn't aware that it was considered historic. She now found out, like, you know, when we're doing the contract with the roofing and to try to push shingle that, oh, this is considered historical. So now you have to go through this process to see if it gets accepted or not.

I had no idea before that the house is part of a historic district. No clue.

Interesting. May I speak to the roofing professional, please?

Please give your name and your address. Yes.

Hi. So my name is Merlin Santos from Imago Roofing. Your address? I'm sorry, what? Your address. Your address. Yes. I'm sorry. So my name is Merlin Santos from Imago. I just got surgery last week. That's what I'm wearing, these things on my eyes.

Okay. So... Please give us your address.

The address that I'm representing? No, your address. Okay. So I'm located in Hollywood, 6145 Johnson Street, Hollywood. But I have a customer. No, that's fine. I have a customer here. That's the reason I'm here. They have the same situation, right? So we got the engineer letter.

Okay, hold on. Can I ask you a question before you continue?

Excuse me. Are you representing this applicant? No, no, no, no, no.

I was about to ask the same question.

It's just a public comment, right?

No, the public comments were open. One second. So you are not part of the Abdiash Science PE company?

No, no, no. This is another case, but it's similar.

He's from the deferred item.

Yes, it's another customer who has the same letter. How can you put a roof so heavy when the engineer is saying that if you put tiles concrete on an old house, it's going to collapse? We don't understand that.

Sir, the public hearing was over. Your chance to speak on that was over. It's limited to the board now. And your item was deferred. Did you understand that we're not hearing that item today? Your item? My item. Is not being heard today.

No. I'm talking on behalf of them and my client.

Okay.

I have a client.

Hold on, it's still my... With the same issue. Yeah, but this is not... But this is not that... But still, let me re-enter my zone. You are a roofing professional, though. Yes, sir. So in your opinion, as a professional roofer, it would not be wise to put concrete tile on a roof from an engineer that says it cannot handle the load. Okay, thank you.

There you go. Thanks, Mr. Campbell.

Okay. My questions are finished.

Mr. Perez.

Hi. I have a few questions to Mr. Ken. When a district is declared historic, do all of the owners receive notification?

Yes.

Okay. I also understand that this house originally had concrete tiles. Was, within this process, Was it verified if the current roof shingles were installed with a permit, the removal of the roof tiles and then of the concrete tiles and the installation of the shingles? Is there a permit showing this change?

When doing the report, there's limited paper files immediately available to us. So as the applicant has said, the current roof that they have on has been there since pre-Andrew, correct? So there's not, I don't have, I did not have a permit record about the current single roof that was there, but it was there prior to it being designated. Per the survey photos that have been submitted, you could see through those Again, the photos started from 2007. Over the last almost 20 years, the houses look basically the same. So we don't have any certificate of appropriateness, any certificates of appropriateness for projects that they've done on the house.

Okay. I have another question. I see in the analysis that the report, this is basically the engineer's analysis, is based on a limited visual review of the roof frame existing structural components. And I understand that there is a cost associated with strengthening this. Is this something that this engineer explained or proposed the potential reinforcement to like what it would consist of? Because obviously, as I'm trying to weigh, if it's a matter of adding some elements onto the roof, perhaps putting some bracing versus redoing the entire roof or the entire structure. Obviously, those are two different things that may help us weigh this. Is that something that was discussed other than just don't do it because currently as it is, it can't hold it?

One second.

Wait a second.

Can we get your name and address?

My name is Dion Jaramillo. I represent the general contractor. Your address, please. 3304 Aventura, Florida. Our office is in Aventura, and I live in there too. That's okay. When we applied for the permit for this property and it was rejected, the city was rejected because we cannot install again the shingles. So the first step that our companies did is to send the engineer to check if we can install it and then to pass the estimate to continue the process for the tile roof. When I explain to them that this is the next step and we need to send somebody else of our crew, they say they know that they cannot force. Of course, the tile is more expensive, but they say, no, we're going to stay with the shingles. In that point, we just enter to the process to put the shingles. We never get to the point to give any estimate or nothing because our next step to continue the project is to send the engineer the right person to see if we are available to put the shingles to a tile roof or not. But we, of course, everything is possible. We can pray there, everything. But everything has a cost. And before we move forward, we need to transfer that information to the client. And in the end of the history, I don't decide it. They are the person that decide it. And they say the same, what they say here. They don't have enough money, and they're retired, and you know, all these things. So I make a... A studio around of that street And it's not just one home. It's five homes next to the next house is still with shingles. And one in front of you is a new project. They did the shingles roof also. It's in front, right? I put it in the everything. I submit all the documents before. One year ago, they did a new roof. And also, it's shingles roof. So if I don't know, I don't have any power to enforce to my client to spend a bunch of money. Because even if it's a reinforced process, it's a process. It's a structural process. It's not beans. It's not something they can buy in Home Depot, you know? So I don't take the client and to push them to put it to just for to sell something, you know? So this is the decision that he make it, and I respect it.

OK, I understand. I wanted to know if you knew. what it would take to reinforce it, maybe even just for your own safety of your home, regardless of, let's say, these roof tiles. I want to know if you were informed of what it would take. So yeah, my other question is if this engineer ran any calculations or made any recommendations, but I assume that wasn't the case, because that's where it was stopped. Those are my only questions. I sympathize with not being able to perhaps afford or something like this. We're in a tricky situation as the board because we're tasked with keeping the character of this neighborhood. But obviously we, I don't think anybody on this board wants to unduly burden a resident or an owner that

cannot necessarily afford something like this so it's not an easy decision for us i want you to know that so let me ask you a question of clarification when you were talking you said you had surveyed neighboring houses we have a document um it's page 23 on our document list showing five houses five of the surrounding houses Is that the one you were referring to?

I submit those documents.

Hold on.

Yeah. And it shows five of the, I'm not sure if there's additional houses in between.

It's the visual that was submitted. It showed only the five of the houses, but overall this specific section of the block is more shingle roofs.

Exactly. That's my point. Did you see the one I'm talking about? It looks like this.

Hold on. Yeah, that is one, but I want to tell you exactly which property they did last year. So give me a second, please. .

So let me ask you, while they're looking, are there two additional properties here?

Okay, so on that block, the house to the east has a tile roof. Brent, I didn't know you couldn't hear me. The house to the east has a tile roof and was just redone. The house to the west of them is being completely redone and gutted. They had a long time, it sat as an, what do they call that, unsafe structure, the house next door. The house on the corner has tile roof. The house across the street has a tile roof. And there's a number of mission style Mediterranean revival things on the on the north side of the street that have flat roofs on them, but they have tile things across the top, you know, you know what I'm talking about the mission style. So that's what it's across the street. The thing here is this is that the Commissioner sent me a text while we were in this meeting saying that she's got money for this woman if she wants to go apply for the grant to get it, to put on a tile roof. My house is a 1946 house. It has a tile roof on it. All of those houses were designed and built for tile roofs, and over the years they've been replaced. When we created that historic district, which I was one of the many people who helped create that historic district, in 2003, between 2003 and 2006, we had a meeting every six months, and all of the information that was put out was put out in three languages. Creole, actually four, Creole, French, English, and Spanish. Because that's the makeup of that neighborhood. So because we wanted to make sure we did this right. Because that was going to be the largest historic district in the city of Miami. It's 500 and some odd properties. And 300 and some odd of them are contributing properties. So if they didn't know, then they didn't go to find out. Or they didn't bother to come to the meetings. But I can tell you, every six months when we had a meeting, we had easily 100 people in that room. So if somebody can tell me that they didn't know that that was a historic district, then I don't know what that's all about. At any rate, there's grant money available to them to go through the process because I've already had to do it with six other people in that neighborhood that are elderly people that are on fixed incomes. We can do that. I would ask them to defer their thing. We'll meet up with them, and we'll get them started through the process of getting this as soon as they can get it done. That's all. They're already financing the roof that they're going to do now. So if you're going to finance the roof, we might as well put on a roof that they'll never have to worry about again. You know what I'm saying? So I'm just saying. And I think it might even be cheaper for them. I'm just saying.

Did you hear everything Board Member Powers just said about the availability and deferring the item? Or do you understand what deferment means? Do you need an explanation from staff?

So what Mr. Powers is recommending is that we defer your item from this evening to a date certain in the future, or we can do it indefinitely, which would mean it would come back in six months. That would give you the opportunity to meet with Board Member Powers to discuss this potential grant money, That he's he's aware of and pursue that to potentially be able to put the tile roof on your home as necessary if that's the case then you would not need to come back here if you're getting the appropriate roof right or if that doesn't work out you would come back and the board could then make a decision at that point in time and it may also give you the opportunity to get a an estimate from an engineer to bring back to the board as to what structurally would need to be done and what that would cost as well.

Can I ask a question?

Yes, sir.

So, Bob, if this family was to accept the deferral, that would mean you would think about the things that are spoken about tonight. It sounds like there's a city commissioner that has money available that maybe could help this and obviously everybody's going to remember this conversation would this be something that you'll be able to facilitate the communication with them in the city commissioner to like so that they don't get stuck in an endless loop they're not going to get stuck in the endless loop we'll make sure that it gets shepard through and i think between me and mr campbell and a couple other people we can make this happen for them the benefit to that

If you follow... And Ken's going to help us with all this as well.

The benefit could be that this could be, even though it's a challenge now and you've been through a lot, obviously, and here you are and this is a crazy process, but the benefit could be that you get a much... The house will be worth more money with that type of a roof on it. Sounds like there's many people that would like to be of assistance based on the situation, so... don't think there's really a risk to deferring it in that context it's up to you guys so I mean they're watching right now and so Can I ask one more question? Yes. So if they defer for a period of time, and by this time next month nothing's happened or it doesn't work out, they could have the opportunity to come back here for us to reevaluate?

So what I would recommend, correct me if I'm wrong, I would recommend indefinite deferral, which is a six-month period. They can come back at any meeting prior to that if everyone is amenable to that.

That would be if they want to go for an asphalt shingle.

So they would just have to pay for re-noticing.

But if they are able to get funding for the tile roof, they would not have to come back?

They could withdraw the request. They have to withdraw, but they could withdraw the request.

The board would have to withdraw the request. So the item would come back, and then we would ask you for a motion to withdraw.

At the applicant's request. At the applicant's request. Yes. Do you understand all of that? Yeah. Is that the route you would like to go?

Let me ask.

Will they have to waive their 60 day notification? Yes. Okay.

I would like to add before you speak, if the board votes against the resolution, you will have to do it anyway.

The resolution, say that again?

Your. your resolution or your application, if the board votes no to your request, you will have to do the tiles anyway.

So let me clarify on that statement, right? So this is an appeal. It would be an appealable decision. So if the board voted tonight, they could vote to approve it. They could vote to approve it with conditions, or they could vote to deny it. If the board votes to deny it, you do have the right to appeal that decision to city commission within 15 days. So I just wanna make sure that that is clear. Also, if you choose, you have the right to a decision tonight. If you choose to defer the item, we're gonna request that you waive that 60-day right, which basically says you're waiving your right to a decision tonight to potentially seek resolution and a decision at a different point. Does that make sense?

.

. . . .

Where is the right there? The reason and the reason, in 92 when I buy this one, it's a chingo. He's had everything, the permit is passed. And now, in the story, the first time, or is the story now? Because in 92, when I buy, I leave chingo. It's leaking, I change, I put the new. It became historic in 2007. So we're asking now if you would like

for us to defer your application indefinitely, which means you have six months. So within that six months period, if you're able to secure funding from the commissioner and put on a tile roof, you do not have to come back at all. If that does not come to pass, you can come back with the same application and we can rule on it then.

. . . . . . .

No, she don't want to, she don't wish to do the deferred.

I'm sorry?

She said to make the decision that you guys are going to make either yes or no, but not to do the defer option. Because she said to waste six more months.

No, you're not wasting six months. You don't have to waste any time. It's just a... giving you that time the opportunity to get the funding together to put the roof on that has been recommended by staff and conforms with historic guidelines

The only . . . .

So yeah, we'll do the deferring within a month to see if we get more information and see where we want to proceed if we retire.

So we're going to defer indefinitely, which means you can come back anytime within the next six months. If you need to, If, however, you're able to meet with the commissioner and get funding to put on the file roof, you do not have to come back at all.

Okay.

Only if that falls through and you need to put on the asphalt shingles, then you can come back. The same thing we did today, except we don't have to go through all the testimony again because we've already heard it. And so just to let you know, that's what we're doing. But I need to ask you if you would defer the 60-day time period for the decision. That's to allow us to do that. To avoid having a decision today.

Mm-hmm.

Should we give him time to talk about this and come back or something? No.

It doesn't cost you any rights.

Okay.

Please be cognizant that we have many more items to go through for the evening. Please be cognizant, aware that we have many more items to go through for the evening. It's not a continual consultation.

I have a question. Maybe it's to Mr. Attorney. Am I allowed to speak Spanish, or does this need to be only in English? Maybe I can facilitate?

I would say it's best to let, yeah, it's best for the record. Okay, thank you.

Okay, so if we select the option to do the deferred, we could come within any time throughout, within the six months to try to make an appeal again?

Yes. And in order to do that, you need to waive your 60-day time period. You just need to waive your right within 60 days to have a decision. You need to have a decision now, but in order for us to defer indefinitely for six months, you just need to waive that 60-day time.

Maybe our attorney, welcome to the board, our new attorney, maybe you could explain that please to the applicant so that they understand that all it means is just that they have a right to a decision within 60 days and it's not another complication.

Right, right, right.

Do you understand what they're saying?

I'm sorry.

Do you understand what they're asking you? Basically, if you defer...

So waiving my rights, that within the 60 days I could come back and do my appeal.

Exactly. You can come back. Waiving your rights isn't stopping you from doing anything. If anything, deferring just gives you all more time for funding purposes and kind of to see all your options. And waiving the rights is just something we have to do. It's more of a formality, but you can come back.

You're not exactly waiving your rights, you're just waiving the time period in which the decision has to be made.

Okay, okay.

So that was a yes?

Yes, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to defer this item.

Indefinitely?

For an indefinite deferral for the address 536 Northeast 65th Street in the Palm Grove Historic District.

Thank you, is there a second? I'll second. Several seconds. Any discussion on the motion? Member Grohl, call please.

Calling Member Najeeb Campbell.

Yes.

Calling Member Christopher Cauley. Yes. Calling Member Julie O'Dell. Yes. Calling Member John Perez.

Yes.

Calling Member Robert Powers. Yes. Calling, I'm sorry, calling Chair William Hopper. Yes. Okay, this passes by a vote of six to zero, indefinite deferral. That will be for December 1st, 2026.

Thank you. We're on to item number four.

This is HEP item number four, file ID 19169, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6 of the City Code of Ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit alterations to a non-contributing structure within the Palm Grove Historic District located approximately at 469 Northeast 69th Street, Miami, Florida 33138, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Thank you as applicant present. Please give your name and address for the record.

Paris Hinkle, 469 Northeast 69th Street, 33138.

Toussaint Cummings, 469 Northeast 69th Street, 33138. Thank you.

We'll start with the staff report.

Okay. Karina Gonzalez de Mendoza, Historic Preservation Planner. I request that the staff analysis be accepted into the record.

Yes.

So this property is also within the Palm Grove Historic District. This is a historic photo of what the house once looked like. As we go to, we can see the partially enclosed porch, and on the other side there appears to be a Florida room to the right side.

I'm going to go to the next.

So I did want to highlight the journey that this specific house has been on, as it is a non-contributing resource of the Palm Grove District. The first photo is from 2011, which is sometime after the designation. We can see that the original porch with the arch doorway had been enclosed prior to designation, and a second entryway had been opened on the facade. Since then, there has been quite a bit of work done on the property, which has slowly made it look more and more as it did in the historic photo by reopening that arched doorway and expanding the enclosed porch, as well as making use of, as we see in the lower right photo, making use of that second entryway. That section, per the historic photo, had originally been a Florida room, based on the historic photo. the proposed changes as we go to the next slide the proposed changes comparing the existing to the proposed from the exterior they are proposing to change out the windows they would be maintaining the exterior maintaining the exterior chimney as well as those planters that are down below and maintaining that archway that we see they do intend as we see on the elevations this is the front elevation They do intend on removing that second entryway, which was not original to the house, as well as removing that shed extension on the section of the roof. Within the porch that has the archway, they would be changing the orientation of the front door to those double glass doors that we see all the way to the right side. So while that is technically visible from the right-of-way, it is within the enclosed porch, so it does not detract from the neighborhood at large. If we go to the next. The other important elevation, the porch that had been there, they do propose on adding an addition to expand the square footage that is seen in the house, and that would mean partially enclosing that porch. So they are maintaining an entryway from the side Paying respect to that original porch by having a large window in place there So that window is intended to be fixed just from a distance to kind of give respect to all the space had been there available when it was An entry porch as we go to the next some of the other changes proposed are just changing out the windows and adding another one towards the rear of the property and

We go to the next elevation.

This is the materials. They do propose limestone tile. They do propose limestone tiles for the entryway for the porch and proposing casement and fixed windows. So with this, staff recommends approval with conditions as the house has slowly been, it is, again, currently a non-contributing resource, but as the changes that have been proposed, it's been slowly returning to look more similar to what it had looked like historically, even with these changes introducing a new fenestration pattern on the front. So we recommend approval of conditions with the idea that if ever there were a resurvey, we could recommend this to be potentially become contributing. The conditions that we do recommend are standard recommendations, standard conditions, but also introducing that the windows flanking the chimney shall have applied muntins with raised profiles and a 12 or 16 light panel with the intention that they would match the original grills that had been present within the historic photo. as well as for the applicant to maintain the ornate iron gate at the porch entrance, and that the sloped tile roof shall remain a barrel tile or a high-profile S-shaped tile, which would be approved administratively as we go through the permitting process, and that they would comply with all requirements throughout.

Thank you.

Anything you'd like to add to the staff report?

Yeah, thank you, Karina. I would love to preserve this home just as much as probably anyone in this room. I am requesting the board to reconsider two of the conditions that were set forth by staff, and one of them is the, since my home is non-contributing, is the muttons on the front windows, and also keeping the ornate gate. An order of priority would be the gate, You would open the gate and take not even two steps to then open the front door. So I was thinking that I would have a iron ornate front door that would look like the gate that's there, so it would just be set back, so it would preserve the original look of the home. And for me, the Muttons is a personal choice since it's not a contributing home.

I didn't put it into the PowerPoint, but I could theoretically pull it up.

What is it that you're looking for in the tax code?

So the ornate iron gate is not original? No.

No. Okay.

Sorry. Sorry.

Okay.

So recall that porch had been entirely enclosed at some point and has been reopened. So the gate that is there now is not the original gate.

Okay. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Yes, please come forward. Give your name and address for the record.

Hi, my name is Henrietta Schwarz, and I live at 2627 South Bayshore Drive. This is an example of people who are doing something that they don't have to do, and they're doing it so well. So I encourage the board to approve this, and with the conditions that the applicant has asked for.

Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and open up to the board for questions or comments, beginning with Mr. Perez.

Hi. I just want to say I appreciate the renovations that have been done. I see the picture from 2011 and it's definitely improvement from then. I can understand the mountains, the tricky one. Because it's part of the historic context. I don't necessarily agree respectfully with the gate, especially because of the small foyer area or the entry area. And I just wanted to say that I'm glad that people like yourselves are taking an interest in improving this at a nice scale and not trying to completely change it, just more preserve it. So that's it.

Mr. Campbell.

Thank you. So the ornate gating question is the one on page five that we can see on the right side picture from the entrance foyer, which is, is that what we're speaking of?

Yeah, you can't really see it in that photo for whatever reason, but yes, the archway does have, oh, you can see it there, yes, does have an iron gate. So The foyer that we're going to close in is going to be about the size of the double door that you see there. The double door will no longer be there, so we actually have an entryway into the home, so you're not walking directly into the living room. So then that wall will be there, but I'm okay with putting an ornate iron NOA hurricane arch door into that foyer, so that would take the place of the gate. But the gate, you would open the gate, take two feet, and have to open another door, and you're able to get into that front open porch area from the side anyway, so there's no extra security measure with having to get there.

I understand. And the gate is not original?

So the gate is not original. Okay. What we've... What we've done sometimes in the past is when introducing a modern element sort of within that porch area, to have something screening that modern element can often be beneficial. In this case, the gate is not original. If the board deems that the new French doors are set back sufficiently, then that's a decision the board is free to make.

That's it for me, thanks.

Mr. Cawley.

Yes, hello. Thank you very much. Beautiful little house and great renovation, and I agree with all of your that those conditions don't seem like a big deal to me, you know, and that's it. Good luck with the project, it's really beautiful.

Amazing, thank you.

Thank you, and how will we know the board's decision as to those two conditions?

We're not there yet.

Yeah. Give us a minute. A motion would be made and then they would, I mean, I don't, I'm cool with not having those conditions, but I guess you have to wait and see how it shakes out. Did we find out today?

Yes, give us a chance. Ms. O'Dell.

I mirror Mr. Cauley's comments completely.

Mr. Bowers.

I just know that if you decide to go historic and have it be historic, you're going to have to put the muttons back in and some of that other stuff. And the gate that used to be on the front of that house, was it turned, was it turned, cypress turned with a copper screen behind it you're talking about the original the original the original entrance into that thing because there's two or three other houses that are built by that same the only reason i know all this is i designated that district so like just reading i had to read everything that came through and i also did all the photographs so um so i'm in my head i'm going through my every time one of these comes up i'm going through my head like that going oh yeah i remember that house And beautiful job. But I'm just saying, so if you go for designation, just be prepared that you might have to put that back on there. I don't care if it's a non-contributing structure.

Just for clarification, if there's a re-survey and they, I guess if the city decides for the home to become contributing, they may require that we put them up in the front window. No.

We would treat it as it is at the time of re-survey and make a determination based on how it is at that time. We wouldn't say to you during the re-survey, well, if you, we're gonna make you put the muntins back on, right? That would not be, that would not occur.

So I have to actually go through because when the property, when that neighborhood was done, all those properties were surveyed and some of them were pulled out and that's something that the chair And I have discussed because he was the chair when I was where you were advocating for this neighborhood to become a historic district so previous Commission person pulled out a lot of properties that should have been put in it should have been left in. So I'm just letting you know so I don't disagree. If that's the way that you want it to be and you want to take those things off, I have nothing to say about that. But if you were trying to do a historically correct thing, we would have a longer and deeper conversation about it. That's all I've got. Thanks.

Thank you.

Any other comments or questions?

I'd just like to say that The non-montanized windows have a modern look that I actually like with the historic form and design of the building. So I'm for not having to do that.

So would you like to make a motion?

Make the motion.

I shall.

Just take those two things out.

Yes, Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve. The SCOA to permit partial demolition additions and site improvements at 469 Northeast 69th Street with all conditions stipulated by staff except the iron gate and the mountains on the windows. I'm not sure what numbers those are.

So for clarification, the motion is to approve with conditions minus condition five, the windows flanking the chimney shall have applied muntins, and condition six, applicant to maintain ornate iron gate in the porch entrance. And so there will be seven total conditions removing those two.

Right.

Is there a second to the motion?

I'll second.

There are two seconds. Any questions? There's a motion in the second. Any discussion on the motion? We have a roll call, please.

Calling Member, I'm sorry, Najeeb Campbell.

Yes.

Calling Member Christopher Cauley. Yes. Calling Member Julie O'Dell. Yes. Calling Member John Perez. Yes. Calling Member Robert Powers. Yes. And calling Chair William Hopper. Yes. This passes by a vote of six to zero, approved as amended. This decision is final unless filed in the hearing board's office within 15 days.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. And good luck.

Excuse me? Yes. Chair, if I may, the power of attorney for item one is here, if you're amenable to hearing it now, or if you wish to maintain it at the end.

Let's hear it now.

Calling HEP item number one, file ID. Sorry, let me go back to it.

Which has been previously.

File ID 17321, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board, pursuant to section 23-6.2, subsection B4 of the City Code of Ordinances, approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit new construction and site improvements on a vacant lot within the Morningside Historic District, located approximately at 5810 North Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida, 33137, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A, the following findings.

And we've already had the staff report.

Do you want me to re-present?

Did we have it before?

Yes, we read it at the beginning.

Right, so we don't need to do that again. We'll just have the response to the staff report.

So also to the chair, there is an additional member of the public who wishes to speak on this as well.

OK. When we reopen the public hearing.

That is after the presentation.

Go ahead. Give your name and address for the record.

Good afternoon. Thank you for accommodating us today. We have our power of attorney, and I think you've already heard from the neighbors.

Yes, but please give your name and address for the record.

Sure. David Scott Troutman with offices at 1533 Sunset Drive in Coral Gables. Thanks. And I'm the architect. For some reason, I'm trying to get hooked up here. Can somebody help me hook up to the internet here?

Yeah, it takes a minute in the back.

Okay, so one of the items that was brought up was the setback on the south side.

Can you please make sure you're speaking directly into the mic?

Sorry, you can't see the plan? Okay.

Can you get a little closer to the microphone?

Oh, okay. So we did fix this page, which shows a 25-foot setback in the tabular information. And then in the graphics, you can clearly see that we have a 25-foot setback now. But I also was asked to provide renderings So I just wanted to show the dais, the renderings. This is the rendering we did for along North Bayshore. And then this is the south elevation where we agree that maybe we can change out some of these windows for doubles per the, the concerns of the neighbors along 58th. Here's the back rendering to be seen from the neighbor directly behind us to the west, and she was here previously. I did show this to her. This is a shot from the corner. The back again lit up, and then the corner condition at night. So we feel this is a more appropriate fit for the historic neighborhood, and we're here to listen to the discussions and decision of the board.

Thank you. Thank you. I believe there was another member of the public who wishes to speak. I'm sorry? There's another member of the public who wishes to speak behind you. If you could allow him to speak.

Thank you. I'll make this brief. I'm Rob Pollack. I've been here five times. I live directly across the street from this proposed property.

And your address?

5724 North Bayshore Drive. Thank you. Generally speaking, the last times I've been here, two things were asked. Please talk to your neighbors. Please change your plans. He's never spoken to me. I haven't met the person yet. I'm happy with the new plans. There are a couple things, though, that I disagree with. One is, I think there's a terrace in South Elevation It's going to face Northeast 58th Street. If that tears us off a common area, it's going to directly affect my privacy with noise and with looking down at my pool and looking at our bedrooms and bathroom and kitchen and dining room. Second, I hope that while there are more than 20 over 20-foot trees that are going to be removed. There's going to be six 45- to 75-foot trees that are being removed. And those are from surveys that are three years old. Also, the critical thing in the south elevation shows that five city trees are removed. And these are trees that run between the sidewalk and the street. Those protect my house from his house. So I'd like you to look at several things here. The terrace and the second deck. All the trees being removed, especially the five in the city that face my property.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Please come forward, give your name and address for the record.

Do you need my address again?

Yes.

Henrietta Schwarz, 2627 South Bay Shore Drive. I think it's a great rework of what they showed prior, but there is this constant issue of clear cutting lots and cutting down big trees. How many people are here for the trees today? Right. So we've been sitting here forever, waiting for a moment, and this is our moment. We've got another one coming up, which we've had to sit through you meandering through this agenda. We'd like item 10 to be brought up next. And the reason is, is because trees are so important to flooding. These are ancient trees. Why are we just wholesale saying, hey, no problem. You want to build a house? Cut down all the trees on the lot. Don't make any exceptions. So that's what I have to say.

Thanks. That's good. Clapping is not good. Thank you. Anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I will close. Okay, come on. I'm not going to ask another time.

My name is Lindsay Kane. Do you guys need my address?

And your address?

333 Northeast 24th Street, apartment 1811, Miami, Florida, 33137. As this issue is pertaining to the trees, and I am here for the same reasons, defending the trees, I would like to speak against this. I moved to Miami seven years ago or so and fell in love with so many aspects of the culture, of the environment, and the trees is a big part of that. And a few years ago, I found out there were laws protecting these trees. And as soon as I found that out, I was singing its praises. Anybody who had anything negative to say about Miami, I would say, oh, but they protect the trees. They actually have a lot of environmental protection laws in place. And this year, I've come to find out that these laws get worked around a lot of the time. So it's been really heartbreaking to see. There are so many empty spaces that can be used, and I don't think it's necessary to cut down, especially historic trees.

Thanks. Yes, ma'am.

Hi, Katrina Morris, 4130 Liebayer Avenue, Coconut Grove. Yeah, the madness needs to stop. I'm wondering if developers have some sort of special hatred for mature trees. Do they care about the livability for the residents of Miami? Are they going to live here long term? Or are they simply mining our land for development dollars? Would we allow a series of strip mines in the middle of our neighborhoods? Because essentially that's what we have. I support a moratorium on all specimen tree removal. Furthermore, our impact fees need to be revisited. We can't just stop. We can't just keep issuing bonds and driving Miami into bankruptcy with all of the public work projects that the removal of trees is going to create. We need trees to filter water. We need trees to mitigate storms. We need trees for biodiversity for habitat. I mean, it just goes on. So I don't know what the overall philosophy is with development and the removal of trees. It seems to me like the developers don't do their due diligence. Like, they show up. They buy a lot. It has existing trees. It seems like they understand that the waiver's a matter of course. I don't understand why you would just assume you can get a waiver. It seems like that would be an exception, like a rare exception. But then they say, oh, it's in the building footprint. Well, it wasn't. you drew the building footprint, you could draw the building footprint around the trees. So it's getting to be, in 2017 it was too much, and now it's ridiculous.

Thank you. Anyone? No clapping, please. You can wave. That's good, thanks. Anyone else from the public for the last time? on this item. I'm closing the public hearing of the board for questions or comments. Did you speak before? Okay, come up. No, you must come up to the microphone and speak into the microphone because it goes out to the public on the television.

Hello, board members. My name is Sophia Maya. My address is 9517 Fontainebleau Boulevard 33172. And I just want to say that, you know, protecting trees, I think, is vital for our community. I don't think that cutting down beautiful trees that have been longer than all of us probably sitting here, I don't think that that is something that's going to sustain our communities. You know, trees provide us oxygen. I feel like that is extremely important. And I feel like Coconut Grove is nothing without the lush trees and environment that we have. This is in Morningside. Huh?

This is in Morningside. This property we're discussing now is in Morningside.

Okay, well, just South Florida in general, sir, you know, it's nothing without the environment that we have, so if we're just going to be cutting down trees because it makes more space for development, then that puts our environment at risk, and that also puts our residents at risk, because what type of message does that send to them, that we could just cut down trees without any type of issue, you know? We have to send a message that protects the residents, protects our rights, and our environment. We cannot keep paying the price for development. That cannot be the case, in my opinion. And, you know, when we speak here, it's because we're concerned about the future and the quality of life. That's the most beautiful part, is the trees that you see that cover the infrastructure, and that also keeps our roads cool from the South Florida heat. So I just feel like it's important to protect the trees that we have. Thank you.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just wanted to make sure that everyone's speaking on this item that we're talking about in Morningside. That's all.

Okay. I just heard that, you know, there was trees that could potentially be cut down. So, you know, I just wanted to express my concern and wanted to protect the trees.

I understand. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who will now, who wants to speak on this item in Morningside? This is your last chance. Public hearing is now closed that means no one else can comment on this item in Morningside Okay, so we're gonna limit open it up to the board for questions or comments. I'll start again with Mr.. Powers I

Good afternoon. So how many of the trees are you mitigating? Are you mitigating any trees on that property and moving them to other locations?

Yeah, here's the tree disposition plan. Maybe you could specify. Everything with an arrow is being relocated. Everything with an X is being removed.

Maybe you could summarize how many are being removed, how many are remaining, and how many are being relocated. I counted 10 that were being removed, which included the six. I'm trying to get that number for you.

Royal palms.

And three African oil palms. I'm sorry, four African royal palms. One Christmas palm. Another royal palm. Out of 40. So there were 10 out of 40.

Yeah, 12 palms. are being moved.

Is there any way, I don't know what they're doing with Morningside Park, but is there any way to move any of that material to Morningside Park? Make a contribution to Morningside Park. Instead of cutting down the trees, moving them down the street to the park.

I think that's possible.

I mean, I would really seriously cut into that because they're going to need some mature trees depending upon how, I'm just trying to make this a little bit less Thing the only my only comment to as you as the architect about the property itself I don't like the roof line that you have on the top of the garage I think it should be a hip roof that dies into the into the wall of the house instead of Water running back to the wall of the house you understand what I do you understand what I'm saying to you on that I I think it should go straight across. I think it would make it look the way that the rest of the roof on the other part of the house is tipped. I'm just saying. That's my only architectural thing about this. My other thing is just I would really meet with your neighbors and find out how to screen off whatever you've got going on so you're not...

In pinching on this, this image here doesn't show all the existing trees that are there. We're not taking out any of those trees.

Okay, we'll sell side. Okay, sir. I'm a neighbor brought up a concern. I'm just bringing it and just All we have to manage all this because don't forget we're environmental protection as well. And you're talking to the guy who actually had people put a piece of property up for sale so they wouldn't cut down an oak tree. and buy another tree, buy another lot to build their house on because they were unwilling to build around the tree. So that's just me, okay? Because I'm a true Floridian, and I think that property should be like some people have said here, that they should take into effect the... I still don't understand why they don't build our houses up off the ground so water can go underneath them. I have no clue what that's all about so that we don't have the problem of flooding And that neighborhood, because that neighborhood also floods. So you're taking a piece of property and putting a fairly large home on it. And that's all. My only thing to your architecture, sir, is I just don't like the roof line on the roof of the garage. That's my only thing. And I would like you to change it. That would be my thing, would be for you to have that die that way. I think it'll look better. and also to meet with the man who is behind you and find out what pisses him off about this. Well, I think he's... Well, I'm just saying, whatever it is, and just work it out with him so that he doesn't lose his privacy.

I just want to know, yeah, but on the west side, there's an entire bosque of trees we're not touching.

All right.

Right here on the south side.

You can't speak. You can't speak to him afterwards, and you guys work it out, okay? You'll get it worked out, believe me. You will. You won't be building the house. So at any rate, that's all I've got. Thank you.

Ms. O'Dell.

I actually agree with Mr. Powers. I really think it's important, you know, I know that fences make good neighbors, but also it's important that you guys iron this out because otherwise it's going to be Hatfield and McCoys, you know.

Thanks. Mr. Colley.

Yes, thanks, Mr. Trotman. So a couple observations. So you went through a total residence redesign. If I'm correctly following this, right? It was contemporary, low-slung.

Well, the style of the house changed. The footprint pretty much stayed the same, but we had to move the entire house back to support the 25-foot setback along 58th Avenue.

But when you say the style of the house changed... In commonsensical terms, the entire design of the house changed. We were all trying to figure out.

It's slightly smaller than it was.

Okay. But the bottom line is you addressed all the comments from before. And then obviously your neighbor has some comments about some screening. I'm not sure I totally followed that was that with regards to one of the upper terraces or upper balconies. I'm not sure if that was facing west or east or north. I mean, It's an interesting corner right on an interesting street. I The big takeaway from the renderings like you just mentioned is that you're not showing any of the existing tree canopy in the right-of-way because you're trying to show the residents. That's correct. The wall there in this particular case, is that wall existing or new?

That's an existing wall that we've... That's the historic wall.

Okay, so you're maintaining historic wall. And if I'm reading the landscape plans correctly, it looks like you're maintaining all of the trees in the right away. Is that correct? Yeah. So I am also simultaneously looking at some aerials online of the property and I see that it's super heavily covered in palm trees. I'm reading the existing tree disposition correctly. are no tree removals they're all palms is that right that is right so not that palms aren't great and beautiful um but you're not removing any large specimen trees from this property well we're taking as many as we can and relocating them on the property right well and which leads to my next question so And is the landscape architect or arborist or anybody here?

He's not.

Okay.

He's out of the country.

Okay. Okay.

Well, I can tell from looking at the landscape plan that, um, I mean, it looks like there's a substantial amount of property in the front yard area. Um, and it looks like there's a lot of new palms and plantings and tropical plantings and everything proposed for that area now and i see that there's a big pool in the back and a big pool deck in the back so um i mean my big takeaway here on this particular property and on this particular parcel would be is there uh A reason why any of those other larger royal palms are not relocated and introduced into the property here.

I mean, could it be I could I could discuss that with the with the landscape architect. I mean, it's possible we could get some additional palms move to the to the south.

Well, but then again, You know, you do you have quite a large area there. My guess is there's probably drainage, utilities, other things probably located in that area as well. So, but Mr. Power's idea about the Palms, you know, obviously there is a gigantic park right down the street and Royals are relatively easy to move and the property is vacant. Is that right? Right now?

The property is a vacant lot.

Right. So there's not an access issue or anything like that. So To point out a few clarifications on things, I don't see any, and I know that this is in technical term things, but the city of Miami and the way its mitigation works and the way its code works, it treats palms differently than trees. And in this case, the big, large trees that I see in the right-of-way are remaining, correct? So obviously, though, there is an interior of the property with a lot of these palms. I mean... My inclination is to imagine that they couldn't have been relocated anywhere else on the property, or maybe somebody would have done that. But you can clearly hear the sentiment here as it relates to this property and the idea. So I'm not sure what to say in this case because there's no one here to be able to speak on it from a commonsensical point of view, like we may be able to do X, we may be able to do Y. I mean, if this is a residence that's being created for development purposes, of course you're going to want the pool.

It's for a family.

For a family? Okay, and I'm not suggesting it is. I'm just saying there's that large rear garden, too, a big pool and a big pool deck. So I think the house is sited very well, and I do think that it seems that preserving the historic wall and these big trees along the perimeter... is definitely a step in the right direction. We don't have a simple solution for the palms on the interior of the property. So those are my thoughts right at this time.

For the record, Mr. Trachtenberg is now in attendance.

Announcing the arrival of Member Jordan, I'm sorry, of Member Jordan Trachtenberg.

Mr. Perez, your turn. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Campbell.

This is one of the most prolific turnarounds of architectural design I've seen while on the board. I think the architect and his team, after speaking with the neighbors, did a major turnaround. In terms of the final issue that I heard earlier with a gentleman in the audience about sight lines, I think that's something that can be worked out, as Mr. Powers said in private conversation, without having to ask the architect to redesign anything major any further as they have already done. And if Chris is satisfied with what's going on with the landscaping, I'm ready to approve this project so far.

Mr. Perez.

Hi. I have to say the difference between the last design to this is Impressive how it was turned around. I don't know what your clients are like, but it's usually not easy to sell this idea to a client, so I can appreciate that. I'm sure it had to do with a lot of the comments you received here, but still, not an easy thing to do. And I wanted to say that it's been thought through. There's thoughtful details that have been studied and the home has been composed in a very nice way. It has been thought through thoroughly. I also wanted to say that I can appreciate the 25 foot side setback. I don't know if there's an overlay here that would change this, but to my understanding, a corner lot typically only requires 20 foot of setback on the primary frontage and 10 foot on the secondary.

The city of Miami requires a 10 foot setback.

On the side. Then on the primary setback, only 20 feet.

And we went 25 feet back.

No, I understand. I wanted to commend you on that because what's being done here is essentially the yard is being put forth to the public way. I'm sure a client would rather have the rear yard be larger, but I wanted to point out that In this case is being presented to the front. And I understand that's based on the neighborhood criteria. I get that. But I wanted to point that out. My only thing with this project has to do with the landscape. I appreciate that all the street trees were kept. Given how magnificent this project is, I'm questioning why the mitigation trees are being specified at only two inches and the palms are only three inches or six inches, given that I would assume a project like this could have the budget to maybe not necessarily put in a specimen tree, but at the least if there's three, two-inch trees, I would like to think that the owner could find it in the budget to put in at least a six-inch tree. So that's something that I would encourage to happen. And also to, I understand that when palms are being removed, They can be mitigated by palms, but I would also encourage that rather than planting new palms, no offense to anybody that loves palms, they might consider planting also, not specimen, but slightly larger diameter trees. That's my take on it.

Thank you. Mr. Trachtenberg.

I'm going to just recuse myself from this one as I missed the item. Okay.

Could we go to the...

So if we can just... Can I have my questions first? I need to address his item since he said he was recusing himself from this. I'm sorry. So if you're recusing yourself from the item, you need to leave the dais.

I guess I will say abstain.

You cannot abstain. The Florida State Statute does not allow you to abstain.

I will go ahead and walk off the dais. Okay. Hold your seat, please.

Okay, now I'll take my turn.

Can we go back to the, show the south elevation, please? Yes. Are those windows aligned? Is there a way to get them to align so they don't look odd?

I didn't understand the question.

The question is, the windows on the second floor and the windows on the first floor do not align at all.

Right. They're actually in two different angles.

Yeah. That's very disconcerting to the eye. Is there a way you can make them more harmonious?

The windows that are in the and the wing that are parallel with 58th Street, the metering of the windows, the program that is behind it, plus a response to an earlier request from staff to make these windows more regularized than the way they were before. The second floor is set back another 15 feet from the first floor on the south facade and is at a different angle. So it's really, it would serve no purpose to line them up because you'd only stand in one position, stationary, to see one or two windows line up, and then as you go past, you would lose the alignment.

You would lose the alignment of the previous windows, but the ones that you see... Let me go to the plan. Okay. Okay.

So you see how this portion of the first floor is parallel with 58th Street. The second floor is perpendicular to Bayshore. So even if I lined windows up, they wouldn't appear to be lined up.

I see what you mean. Is there a way, though, that you could, instead of having individual windows, you could mention something about putting a double window in?

Yeah, we can do that.

I think that would be less confusing to the eye.

Well, so some of these windows here, we can make doubles along the bottom. We have to figure out, take a look at the program, see which ones are the most appropriate. But if a variegation in size is endeavor to make that change.

I think that would be a good idea. Also, I agree with my colleagues that moving the Royal Palms rather than cutting them down would be a good move, perhaps to Morningside Park, since it seems to be losing trees right and left these days. I'm very well acquainted with this property, having visited it many times in the previous century. And so I'm looking forward in Well, I'm old. By previous century, I mean the 20th century, not the 19th century. But I'm wondering, and I do notice that you're only removing palm trees, not shade trees. That's correct. those shade trees being mostly black olives, and I think there was one oak tree and one mahogany tree. And I'm a little concerned to have seen on Zillow that this property was for sale for $4.1 million.

I didn't understand the question.

I said I was concerned having seen this property for sale on Zillow for $4.1 million. Can you explain what's going on there if it's not a development?

Are you talking about the street trees?

No, I'm talking about the property itself. The property is for sale for $4.1 million.

By that I have no, nobody said anything to me.

I'm telling you now.

It's news to me. But as far as I know, the owner is going to build the house and move in. That's what he's told us point blank.

But yet it's for sale. Okay. Anyone else have a question?

Can I have a follow-up question, Mr. Chair? Sure. Please. So, Mr. Trotman, again, looking at the plan right here on the screen, what is the big white area... the west of the it looks like the property line what is the big white area to the left of the pool like the property line it looks like there's a big space yeah there's a there's an easement that was an agreed-upon easement between the previous owner

property to the West and the previous owner of the subject property. And we are maintaining that easement.

Well, great. But is there a reason why that easement can't be, I mean, there's some palms and vegetation in there.

That is not, that is not our property. That is the dedicated easement. And those trees, we can't do anything with those trees. They're on their neighbor's lot. That's the neighbor's property. Even though the property line shows here. It's a dedicated easement to the neighbor to the west, maybe our staff.

Our historic officers and planning and zoning officers. Could you weigh in on what that means.

So I can't, I can't specify what the conditions of the easement are. But my understanding is the adjacent property owners holding an easement onto this specific property and any use or development thereof would potentially impact that easement.

That doesn't sound right. Somebody else can't own your property.

They don't own it. They hold an easement on it. It would be the same as a power company holding an easement or a sewer company holding an easement on your property. And there is a physical wall there that they retain as part of the easement.

May I?

That's why we have this specific condition in this particular staff analysis, because this is something that we don't normally deal with. And we wanted to make it very clear that the board's approval of any project here does not supersede the easement, does not... Deny the easement. The easement is the easement. It's part of the property record.

Do we, I mean, maybe just answer this. Do we know what the conditions of this easement are? No. Are you familiar with the conditions of this easement?

The easement was, from what I read, it was in perpetuity between these two properties. sign by the previous owner of the property to the west and the previous owner of the subject property? Maybe.

So it sounds like it's an access easement?

Well, if it's an access easement, if I'm not mistaken, you're allowed to plant trees there. I've developed properties that have easements and you cannot build a permanent structure within that. But trees can be planted with the understanding that Our company if utilities men can come in and unfortunately cut them down, sadly, but That's been least my experience. I don't know if Mr attorney, you might be able to win on So I think that if you want it to modify the condition.

I think you could say, I mean, we would have to do some research to look at The easement either it would be either recorded on the plot or it would be recorded within the deed. So, or there would be some type of covenant. There would be some type of legal instrument. So we could do research to see if that legal instrument specifies whether or not trees could be planted within that easement or if it's just an access easement. And so by planting the trees, they still have access that they need. Who the owner of the easement is, because if the two owners agree, then it may not be an issue. So you could modify the condition so that we could do research and we can explore that as we move forward just so we can move everything forward. I don't know the exact language that's contained in that easement.

Why are you asking about the easement?

Why am I asking about it?

Yeah.

Well, because it's a big piece of land on the west side of the property, and if it was on this property, you'd relocate a lot of those royal palms there, no problem, because you don't have any proposed site improvements or drainage or anything there. And I think that... I'm just trying to look for solutions here that maybe aren't necessarily readily available to you as the architect, right, when you're under, you have a client, you're doing the best you can, but it seems, it does seem, even though just, as our fellow board member here has mentioned, you know, in my opinion, and based on the beauty of this neighborhood and based on what's happening there and the great job you've done with the architecture, I think there are things you could do in some of the landscape areas or in that easement that could help. I mean, you're not going to move the Royal Palms to the park.

I mean, how's that going to happen? I could discuss it with that homeowner, but that homeowner controls that.

Well, I mean, the other thing I would say, and it's unfortunate as this, but it'd be great if your landscape architect was here and your arborist, because there's a lot of people here that are very interested in hearing about this. And, uh, it would be very helpful to have somebody be able to be here to help explain some of these details. So, you know.

So your point was that the easement might be used to accept some of the problems that are being moved.

Yeah, I mean, it's definitely not just going to be white space. Yeah. Something's got to go there. Yeah. And I mean, that's what I think. I think it would be worth asking that neighboring property and addressing. I mean, you're this close. I haven't heard anybody come here and speak that strongly about the design of a residence in a long time, especially Mr. Cruz. And he did. And there was a lot of really positive things that were said, but maybe one more step is what it takes. I mean, I just, you know, And so it's a question for you, but I mean, those are some pretty big unanswered questions. I've never seen an easement on somebody else's property before. Somebody else controlled what happens on it like this.

Well, that was a condition of the division of the lot because this property was originally connected to the house next door. Well, it was built away from Bayshore Drive because the owner of the house allegedly did not want his wife seeing when he was visiting his mistress at the house, so he built the house away from Bayshore Drive. And so at some point, they built the wall, extended the wall that went around the property in the middle of the two lots So they would have a garden area and the house. So when previous owners divided the lot, my understanding is that they maintained this easement to make sure that that wall that you see still there, right, on the west side would remain. That was the point of the easement.

We weren't going to touch it because it's not on our properties in the dedicated easement. Right.

I mean, can I say one more thing? Would it be... We just want to do the best that we possibly can here to help preserve the vegetation as best we can. But with that said, there's a lot of times there's things that... are impediments to that. And in this case, I think that whether it's a deferral or a continuance or a condition that that be studied, I think somehow there has to be some clarification on that Western property line.

I think the condition would be good.

I prefer, obviously, to make it a condition, which we would enact.