Historic Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening. We do have a quorum. We have Angelica Lane here in the chamber, Erica Hubs here in the chamber. We have Julio Guillen. We have Manuel Menendez and Guadalupe Perez. Can you hear us in the chambers?

Are you ready to go? Yes. Call the meeting to order. Yes. Okay, let's pledge allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, let's have a roll call. I can start and jog around.

My mic is not on.

There. Angelica Lang? Erica Hubbs? Can you guys do roll call?

Board members, you are muted.

Can you hear us? Yeah, let a woman in those here.

Guadalupe Perez.

Mr. Guillen?

Thank you. So do we need to swear in our, we need to swear you in if you're going to speak? So if you could stand up and come to the center, and they'll swear you in.

If anyone will be speaking today, Chairwoman, just for clarity, they've not registered as lobbyists, which is a requirement to present. However, you can always ask questions of the applicant. They are available. And that is one of the exceptions to the lobbying rule. You have their project manager, their professional staff, and so if you have questions you need to ask, information you need, you can do that. Now, to the applicant and your project manager, even though you're not registered as a lobbyist, you can still answer those questions and those answers need to be under oath because this is a quasi-judicial proceeding. And if your answers are not under oath, they could be given less judicial weight. Okay, and so if you plan on speaking, even if maybe you'll be speaking, we ask that you please stand up and be sworn in. So now's the time for that. Would you raise your right hand, please? Right hand. Yes, you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Perfect, that's it, easy, thank you. It's all yours, Chairwoman.

Okay, so let's open the floor to the... the topics at hand and of which they're our first topic.

Yes.

Yes, good afternoon. This item is HPB-2026-003-COA. Applicant is Daniel Castillo for the property located at 6218 South Coast 56, Miller Drive. It's for an exterior renovation. This is located in the Cambridge Lodge Historic District. The applicant is proposing to do renovations to the house that include the removal of windows and doors on the property to accommodate new impact resistant glass glazing for the building. They will also be repainting the building as well. And they're proposing to install a new terrace at the back of the property. Staff wants to point out that an updated staff report was sent earlier today. And prior to that staff was recommending deferral mainly because it was staff was on the impression that the Terrace was a covered Terrace and they did not show any type of renderings for that covered Terrace The applicant has since corrected staff and informed them that the Terrace is not covered It's it's open. It's open air. There's no roof on top of it. So staff amended its its recommendation to be approval and They've also addressed some of the comments that staff had with the impervious coverage as well as some of the setbacks. There's still some changes that need to be made, but they can be made prior to going to building permit. Therefore, staff is recommending that the board approve the item and allowing it to move forward to permitting. I'm available for any comments or questions that you may have, board. Thank you.

Does anybody have any questions? No? Julio, do you have any questions, no?

Chairwoman, I think it's just as a procedural point, you should open it to public comment, although we see that there's no other public comment. There's no one here, so. Just open.

Open to public comment or if anybody's listening online, they can make a comment. So there's nobody here except for our applicants. So if anybody on the board has any questions and they'd like to present them at this time.

That includes questions for staff or the applicant who is sitting here and available to answer questions.

Hey, I'm sorry. I looked at the renderings for this project, and the elevations appeared to show that on the front of the property, the windows and doors were all remaining the same number in the same position that they currently are. Is this correct? From the applicant? Staff, could you pull it up? Is there an opportunity to do that?

Let me see if I can pull it up for you. Do you see the?

Yeah, yes.

I think it's in the agenda, everything.

Yeah, it's pulling here.

Do you see the plans now?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we do. Okay. Excellent.

So this is the demo? Yeah. And so what they're proposing is this page?

Excellent. I mean, this shows the same number of windows and doors in the same position. And this proposed, these elevations show, you know, the mountains and, you know, windows looking segmented and not, you know, huge and modern. So that's, I mean, that looks great.

Just so you know, there are some windows that are going to be removed. Like for instance, if you look at the demo permit, like the existing right elevation, There are windows that are changed, like the versus the proposed. There was a door. It looks like there was a window removed. Yeah, I see what you mean there.

There is a window removed.

Yeah, so there are changes to the elevations. Making sure the board is aware of that.

Are there any other significant ones there that you're aware of? Marcus?

There was a door on the re-elevation. towards the, I guess there's a bump out of the back that's being removed. They're opening up the back of the building to put a new sliding glass door for the terrace next to the window. It used to be just a window. Now they're opening it up for an actual door. On the front elevation, that one looks to stay there. The door that's on the front, Front elevation on the right-hand side, that door is being removed and replaced by a window.

Oh, OK. Yes.

And then on the left elevation, it showed five windows, whereas they're only going to have two.

Would you mind looking at the top down, please, for a second?

Which one would you like to see again, sir?

The top-down, the proposed top-down, just to get an idea of where that deleted thing is.

Oh, like when you say top-down, you mean the site plan?

Yeah, please. Sorry.

It's okay. Or would you like to see the floor plan?

No, like from the top, what it looks like from the street. I'm curious about how far forward the, trying to imagine, there you go, just a little bit down here.

Well, that plan is a plot. This page, this page. That's the survey. Yeah. Here you go.

Yeah. Right.

Yeah, what they're doing is a new terrace.

Yeah. And, you know, well, anyways, just a thought. I mean, it looks like, you know, some of those things that are being removed are, you know, they're behind the gates and all that. I don't know. I don't have an issue with it. Julio's the architect here.

No, I don't have an issue with it. I think it's fine. They are, you know, they're using the, like you said, you know, with the mountings, segmenting the the view it's bronze color i i would prefer white but you know it it's fine you know uh the picket fence is also bronze so kind of matches the the windows you know so i think it's fine from my point of view i think it's fine does anyone else have any comments on it i mean basically they're not changing anything else in this theater really you know they have It's not clear what color they are, but by the renderings, they don't look, you know, they're not renderings, really. So is that something that will be later, or it's now that we look at that?

Are you asking what color the exterior of the house is going to be?

Right, right, yes. The exterior of the house, it's on the building elevation. Let me go down.

I didn't see. Is there a note there? Oh, there it is.

Yeah, exterior painting will be Benjamin Moore. Benjamin Moore alabaster.

Yeah, it's fine. Yeah, it's all kind of white. Yeah. Excellent.

I'm sorry, what was that? Board number?

Should we move to approve? I mean, I would make a motion to approve this. I second.

Yes, I second the motion.

Excellent. Congratulations. You're approved.

Well, let's take a vote. Let's do it right. Okay. Yes. All in favor? Aye.

All in favor? Aye. Aye.

Aye. Any nays? I think that's unanimous. I think it is unanimous.

You're approved.

Thank you so much. Thank you very much. You, too, have a good evening. You're welcome to leave if you would like to stay.

You can say you can leave, whatever you would like. Thank you. You're welcome. Enjoy.

So the next item we have is a public comments on new business. We have a discussion regarding the amended historic preservation regulations, I believe, with the city attorney-elect. Would you like me to do it?

I'm happy to do it. Not a problem. Take it away. So board members, Further to your instruction, a few meetings ago now, after Mr. Menendez raised concerns about how applications are processed initially when they're first received by the building department, we drafted proposed legislation to make the change so that every application, rather than only those determined by the building official to be non-substantial, would come to this board. That was a mouthful. Let me rephrase it in the past or currently to the even today the way that applications come to you are first a building permit applications received. The building director reviews it and makes a determination as to whether it needs to go to this board. Her determination is based on a few factors, but the primary question she's asking is, is this something that materially affects the character of the building? So, for example, a like-for-like roof change, and we discussed this a while back, but I just want to refresh your memory. A like-for-like roof change, the same exact look may not have to come to you. Yeah, go ahead.

Yeah, one thing is that's very subjective because that's how we got here in the first place. I understand. Someone said that something was a color, and my position is that it was initially brown. When it's mildewed, it looks very dark, and then someone goes, hey, it's charcoal. Let's approve charcoal. And that is a more modern and different look than the house had.

Correct. And so to your point, your point was well received by the rest of this board and they supported the idea of the city advancing legislation to change the way it's done. We talked about a few different options on how to do that. And then the building official chimed in to explain, look, You don't have that many applications in the city or that many historic properties in the city to begin with it's not that burdensome to just have everything go to you and So we drafted legislation and you can see it as part of your agenda packet. We drafted legislation that would do exactly that When that discussion was opened the City Commission proposed some additional changes as well And so that extra language is also included in the legislation that's in your packet. You don't need to vote. You don't have a legal authority to vote on this legislation. Once that ship was launched, it's been launched, the planning board approved it, city commission directed it, now the city commission has to take two votes to approve it. This item on the agenda is here to notify you that the progress is being made and to also notify you because we had some attendance issues on the last meeting that there's an additional, this additional change is coming or has been proposed. It may not be adopted. That change is to modify the quorum rules for this board. Today, the way the code is written, it says that only three persons are required to meet quorum. And that's unorthodox. Traditionally, quorum means 50% plus one. of the of the membership is required for quorum and of course your board is not six people so three are not not even five so three people was never enough this new proposal would change the composition of your board so that it goes from a nine member board to a seven member board with two persons serving as alternate members those alternate members would only vote when there's an absence from one of the regular board members An additional thing that it does is it changes the quorum requirement, so it's no longer going to be three. Since there's going to be seven members, it's now going to be four. That would be 50% plus one, right? And then... The additional thing that it does is it clarifies that in order to meet quorum, we need to have four people present in this room. Oh. Not just on Zoom. Okay. Okay. And so... These are bigger changes than you asked for, but sometimes when you open up the hood, you find there's a few other fixes that need to be made. And so the hood was opened. We're making the change that this board suggested with respect to COAs. We're also tweaking the voting rules and the board composition rules.

I have a question. Do we have open seats right now, or are we full with board members? Because I know we're talking about numbers, but when I count, we don't have the full number.

Right now so I don't know if it's someone is absent or is it because they have open seats so right now Technically speaking there are open seats miss Marcus sent out an email identifying a couple board members I believe miss Perez Guadalupe. I believe you're one of them The rules state that if you are absent three times in a row that you are deemed no longer a member of the board and

Yeah, but I've never been at some three times in a row.

Okay, so I'm glad you're here to clarify that. Two. Two and one was because I had an emergency. So, Marcus, can you confirm who those members were?

Certainly. Give me a minute.

Yeah. But to your point, Ms. Lang, how the, one of the things I wanted to talk to you about was exactly that. You guys hear an echo on my microphone? Pretty bad, right? Maybe if I point it away. Well, I wanted to discuss exactly that. And I wanted to discuss amongst this board the best way to address the number of votes. One way to do it would be the next person out, because there are term limits. And so the next person out could become the alternate. Or the last person in could become the alternate. We can sort that out. The commission could also decide for you. My recommendation is to think about it, just give some suggestion to the administration how you'd like it to be handled, and then we could pass it to the administration and to the commission so that they can consider that.

I guess I have a couple of questions. One is how many vacant seats, how many of us really are there? And then the next question is, the longevity of each person's seat, like when does our term expire? Because I'm not sure if anybody exactly knows exactly when they started versus when their term is finished.

So I don't have the dates of each of your terms handy, but each term is for two years. Two years, correct. So as to the specific dates for each of you, I can pull that up, unless Marcus, you happen to have it.

I was looking for the list of people who missed more than three. What was the question, I'm sorry, Vice Chair?

There were two. Like how many of us are in total, and do we have open seats? So that's going to make it difficult for us to have the number that we're stating, you know, the 50% and all. If we have open seats, you kind of need all of us here then who is filling the seats. And then the second one, because we're saying terms will expire, And therefore, they either go to alternate, or my question would be, when do our terms expire?

The terms expire, I'd have to check with the city.

I know it's two years, but I have no recollection of exactly where I am in my terms.

Yeah, we'd have to check with the city clerk.

I don't know if the rest of you know when your terms?

I've been on the board for over 10 years.

Yes, but you may have, it's very likely, you know, I haven't been here for two years, but it's very likely that your terms were, you were re-approved to continue on the board. The city commission does take these votes. So that's very likely what's happened, Mr. Menendez. The question is, when were you last renewed?

And would it be the commissioner who appointed you that would re-

Because they nominated you? It need not be. It can be any one of them, or it could be as a whole.

OK.

So to answer your other question, the board right now consists of nine board members. We did have a full board. After the April 27th meeting, three of those nine members had missed three consecutive meetings in a row. Those were? Mr. Israel Rosado, Ms. Lily Ferrero, and Ms. Guadalupe Perez. Ms. Perez, according to the schedule, you missed February 23, March 30, and April 27.

You're muted. So we can hear you.

I don't have a recollection of missing three. I have a recollection of missing two. And that's because one afternoon I have an emergency. I have a dog at home that I needed to take to the emergency room. But I honestly don't have a recollection. But if you say that, then I'm in that list.

So if she's on that list and she wants to correct it, for lack of a better term, what is it?

If she wants to remain on the board, we just have to contact the commissioner that appointed her to have her reappointed.

Correct. That's the fastest solution. And by the way, Ms. Perez, We have multiple boards. They all have the same rule. And you are not the first. I promise you, you are not the first person that this happens to. And you may be right. Maybe Marcus is wrong. We'll check the records, OK?

But you are not the first person. You will not be the last person that this happens to.

And we've corrected it on several occasions in the past. We'll just do a reappointment. Okay, thank you. So nothing to be embarrassed about like you said emergencies happen, you know, so yeah, I totally understand But chairwoman to your to your point. Yes, we can have that corrected. That wouldn't be an issue. I We have not heard for some time, I haven't heard personally for some time, from Ms. Ferreiro or from Mr. Rosado. Yeah. So they may not be interested in continuing to participate. And to be frank, that might address your concern about who the alternates will be. We can have the two new persons serve as alternates.

OK. Yeah.

Ezra Rosado hasn't been to any of the meetings in 2026. Right. He's missed all four, well, now five of them.

Right. So it was like self-selected, not continuing in a way.

It might have worked out OK. And yes, I haven't heard from Ms. Ferreira in a while either. So I don't know if you have, Marcus.

I'm sorry.

Have you heard from Ms. Ferreiro, Lily Ferreiro?

No, I have not. I'm looking at my chart, and actually, I stand corrected. Lily is the one that missed four in a row. She missed all of them for 2026. Israel was at the January meeting, but he hasn't been since.

Okay.

And as somebody who's newer onto the board, I think it makes sense for the newer individuals to serve as alternates. We wouldn't want to take the vote of somebody who's been sitting on the board for a really long time. So I think I agree with that.

Yeah. I think that makes sense also, but it may not be necessary for you to serve as an alternate, okay, in this case. To the contrary, we may need you to serve as a regular board member because of the open seats. Correct.

OK. So if we have these open seats, is this something that's mentioned to the commissioners? Because I know oftentimes they are the ones that propose or designate. What happens now? Are they made aware that these open seats are there so that they can propose people? Yes.

The answer is yes. Marcus or I will notify them with the caveat that if the commission's also going to pass this new law, OK, any appointments that they may want to make may be clear that these may be alternates. They may also want to simply delay till this new law. They decide where they're going with this new law. It's not a sure thing. I mean, they asked for it, so presumably they're going to approve it. OK, but you never know. Sometimes people change their minds, and they decide not to approve the law that's moving forward, as it's moving forward, OK? But we will notify them with that caveat.

Does anybody else have any other comments or questions? No? No? So I think we're wrapped up that topic.

Yes, I have a question. Yes, go ahead. Because if the period is two years, I know the markets don't have the dates right now. I'm trying to see my emails when I was appointed. But I'm sure... It was before 2024. So it's just like something that it renews automatically. We don't have to ask for to continue.

It does not renew automatically, but we do. But, you know, I mean, if you don't want to continue, let us know. No, no, I want to continue. Yeah, I know, I know. But I'm saying, I don't mean you specifically. I mean, if any board member does not want to continue, obviously you can let us know. But we do notify the board, the commission, when the terms are up. We usually notify the board members when their terms are up. And, you know, if they decide they don't want to do it, we'll find someone else.

Okay. Okay. Just I'm checking my email and I have emails from different people, but I might be for Nikki from Lourdes when Lourdes was here from now for Marcus, but I don't see any email. So if it's somebody else, I have to put it in my email. in my contacts because I'm missing probably information.

Sure. Any notice would most likely come from either the clerk's office or from Marcus. OK. And in the past, of course, it would have come from Lourdes. Yes. I'm seeing those. This year is when Marcus took over.

Yeah. Yeah, it took over in November of last year after she retired.

Anybody else have any comments or questions or moving on to the next topic? This is something that is a discussion. It's nothing for us to vote on, or is it?

There's no vote required. Any guidance? I mean, I heard from one board member that if it becomes necessary that they like the idea of the newest board members serving as the alternates. I don't think that's necessary. Does anyone else have a feeling on that?

No, I think it's fine. I think we need her.

We definitely need her. We absolutely need her. I'm just saying, does anyone have an idea as to if you want to specify an approach for who should be the alternates? Or it may have resolved itself because Israel and Lily haven't shown up.

Right. I would say it makes sense. to have the new members as the alternates because they have least exposure to what's going on. And the people who have been here longer may have more ideas on how things work. And so I guess you could say you get your training wheels off in a way. But I think it's also something that's very intuitive. If needed, jump on.

Beautiful. Okay, so we'll leave it be. I think I hear a majority of the board's feeling on the subject, and we can move on.

Perfect. Thanks. So next on the agenda is approval of the meetings. So I move to vote that we approve the meetings from March 30th. Second. Second. Third? All in favor. A favor? OK. All in favor. Great. So it's a unanimous vote? Mm-hmm. OK. Our next meeting is Monday, July 27. And that's all the business that we have at hand. Anything else that's missing or any other topics anybody wanted to bring up?

OK. Enjoy your June, board members.

Thank you guys for your time.

Thank you. Thank you guys. And I'm sorry. I didn't have a third meeting.

No worries.

I promise. Thank you. Bye. Good night.