Historic Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. I'd like to call this meeting to order and start it out with a roll

call so we can see if everybody's here.

Ezrae Craig? Sir? Who calling role? Ezrae Craig?

Yes.

John Miller? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Chris Kopezes? Here. Vlad Dumitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. Jim Chart? Yes. Jim, I still need to read from form eight b regarding the vote conflict from the HPV meeting on January 15. Carol stepped down on item 7B, which is 310 Northeast 1st Avenue because she was in her for the special private gain or loss as she was a landscape architect for this project.

Thank you. Any questions with the agenda? Additions, deletions, revisions? Can we have a vote on approving the agenda? So moved. Second.

All in favor?

Aye. Opposed?

Okay, good. Any minutes to be reviewed and discussed? Soon, though. Right? Yeah. You expect us to remember back six months. Yes. Okay. Swearing in of the public. So anybody who is intent on speaking this evening, please stand up and raise your right hand.

Please raise your right hand by the authority vested in me, the notary of the state of Florida. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Do.

At this time, if there are any comments from the public on subjects that are not part of the agenda, this is the time to speak. Is there anybody who wants to speak on items that are not on the agenda?

George Long, 46 North Swinton. I have a handout.

Would you hand these out, please?

I just handed out the picture of the week because it was so unreal. There's a picture of Union Station owned by Penn Central in New York City, And they went to the Landmark Preservation Board

Mister Long?

Just 55 stories on top of that.

George, I

think you need

to face this. Oh, you guys? Is Grand Central

Anyway, this is Grand Central Station owned by Penn Central. Or and I'm sorry. It's Union Station in the alright. I quit. Well, anyway so I thought the picture was just so interesting to see something like that, and that was for real. And I thought as a historic preservation board, you might run across something like that and probably turn it down. And the important thing about that, actually, is it's a landmark case, and it was one of the first cases where the federal government had to weigh regulatory taking against historical preservation. And guess who won? Historical preservation. In Florida, you don't have to go as far as the taking.

You just do Burt Harris. And when they started talking about historic district in Atlantic Avenue, I thought, oh no, Burt Harris. But apparently, if you want to, you can do it. Burt Harris Act won't stop you. And the reason I mentioned that is some people have mentioned like, oh no, they're gonna sue us and stuff. Anyway, thank you. I thought you enjoyed

You're basically talking about air rights and the buying and selling of air rights. Air rights. Because I think that's

Well, this had air rights too, and they turned it down. The Penn Central Station, they could have sold the transfer development rights and the preservation boards to let you guys do that. They said, no. It's not going to that's not as good as building something on top. That's not a good trade. And but in New York, they did this a few times with the air rights. And in Florida, they've done it some too. Not like here, but to put places maybe not air rights, but other type of transfer development rights. So that's all I can say.

It's always appreciated.

Mister chair and board, Roger Cope, Cope Architects Inc. 71 Southeast 1st Street Marina Historic District. I just wanna make a public announcement of the preservation trust of which I'm a a member is sponsoring this month at the end of this month, March 29, which is a Saturday. It's going to be held in the old School Square Gym, the field House. We are sponsoring a historic preservation educational event and that's centered around Legos, the, you know, the little building blocks all of our kids and grandkids use.

And so we have an invitation to the public, and I I I just wanted to make sure you guys got a flyer. I'm gonna give it to Denise, and she can pass that around. But it's it's there's no real age limit to the youngsters that can participate, and it's run by a retired architect that does this all over the country. So it's a very successful event. What what we've we've been spending a year preparing for this thing.

We've identified 65 historic preserve buildings that merit historic preservation classification of some sort throughout the city of Delray. 65 of them. You know? We started with, like, a 100 and we boiled it down to about 65. And and the kids kids come into the gymnasium and and the teams, they form little teams, you know, and they think about this beforehand.

And they they get to pick which building they want to build out of Legos based on a photograph that we provide them. And on the back of the photograph is a little tiny history of the building. So it's you know, there's the educational part. So they get two hours to build it and it's not a, you know, it's not a competition. Nobody walks out with a big gigantic prize or anything.

But one of the coolest things that we do, we print a map of the of of the core of Downtown Delray in which all 65 of these buildings are identified. And they after they build it, they get to pick it up from their table, their little work table, and they go place it on the map itself. So, you know, so it'll be you'll see the and this map is about as almost as big as this room. So they they they take their shoes off. They walk across this map.

They put their Legos model down, and then they just stand back. And our emcee talks about every single building, you know, highlighting history that's on the back of that card plus plus a little bit more. So it's just it's a family oriented thing. It's a blast. I've seen it in action. I participated. Kids just love it. They eat it up attention, and it's just a great event. So I'll if I can, I'll give these to Denise. And and if you will, I'll I'm gonna email everybody tomorrow that flyer as a reminder.

But if you can promote it in any way, show up, put a team together. We're challenging the DDA. We're challenging the CRA. We're I I challenged every architectural firm in town to put a team together so that they can maybe select one of the buildings that they had participated in in some way. So it's gonna be a ball. Thank you for your time.

Roger. Thanks. I think that's perhaps our first public service announcement. Alright. Any other comments from the public? Alright. Let's move on. Any presentations from staff? Alright. This is expedition. So that means that we can march right into quasi judicial hearing. So let's get started with the first one.

Hi. Michelle Hoyland, principal planner.

Hold on.

You better read the rules.

Sorry. You wouldn't mind reading the rules.

Glad we have you there, Kelly. Okay. This hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the city of Delray Beach quasi judicial rules. The applicant and the city shall be permitted to present their case. The public shall be allowed to speak for three minutes each or a maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or a group of people who are present but agree not to speak.

The board members, staff, and applicant may be allowed to cross examine each witness. The city or the applicant will be allowed time to offer rebuttal testimony. The decision to approve or deny an application or an appeal may not legally be made upon personal views as to whether the project is a good project or not, nor may a decision be based on the numbers of citizens who support or oppose a particular project. The law requires that all decisions must be made on the basis whether the project meets the requirements of law, the comprehensive plan, and the land development regulations. Alright.

Thank you, chair. Michelle Hoyland, principal planner. I'd like to enter file number 2024225 into the record. This is for a COA at 202 Northeast 5th Court. And the applicant is here and their agent and they will present first.

Thanks. It's actually, 5th Harris.

Oh, did I say something else?

It says court on this one.

I hope it doesn't say that through the whole presentation. This is the owner. It does. This the record should show that it's 202 Northeast 5th

does on the agenda.

That's Before

he starts, should we do ex parte?

Sure. Yes, please.

I drove past the property, but I haven't spoken to anybody. Okay.

Carol?

No. Drove pass.

That's her. No. No. Alright, sir.

Okay. I have ten

minutes. Fifteen.

Oh, fifteen. I hopefully won't use fifteen. Welcome, Mark Schleisman. My wife, Amy Davidson, we bought this house back in June and have been eagerly awaiting our time here to talk about the enhancements we'd like to make to the house. The house was built in 1951, has changed quite substantially in that time, and the changes we're planning on making are gonna be hopefully further improvements but not overly dramatic from a street scape standpoint.

What you can see in front of you is just what we're gonna cover, and I'll dive right in. First introductions besides myself and my wife. Tyler is here from our our construction company. We also have architect and engineering staff that have been involved for the last several months to put together the material that you have received already and what we're gonna talk about in the next few minutes. So quick overview.

It is a relatively small house as is typical of this area. The house when it was originally built in 1951 was a very typical flat roofed small house with a carport. Over the years, it changed into a somewhat larger house, but still a two bedroom, two bath, relatively small house on the corner of Northeast 2nd Avenue and Northeast 5th Terrace. You probably don't see it very well from the street because many years ago, a hedge was put in that pretty much blocks the whole view of the house from the streetscape. And the other two sides, the neighbors have put up fences sometime in the past that are good six foot wooden fences.

So they can't really see into our property from side either the south or the east. What we're planning on doing, which you'll see shortly, is to put an addition in the back of the house. The back being the side away from Northeast 5th Terrace. So basically, the open space between the back of the house and that fence that I referred to, two thirds of it or so would be occupied by an addition. So it's taking an existing rectangle and adding a rectangle to it.

Would also like to put in a pool. That pool would go in the west yard, and you'll see that in the plans when we get to it. So that's the the substantial part of what we're asking for. It's an addition in the back, pool on the side, and a couple other minor changes which we'll refer to as we go through the materials. As it says at the bottom, there's some demolition needed to put the addition on the back.

You gotta open the back wall. Not the entire wall, but a good half of it so that you can walk from the existing house into the new addition. That's the basics. Please feel free to interrupt as I go if there's questions but the diagrams and such will provide more detail. You probably can't see this as well as I could when I had on my computer but it shows you roughly where this is. It's right up Northeast 2nd Avenue. When you cross over Northeast 4th Street, there's 5th there's three fifths after that. Right? There's 5th Street, 5th Court, and then 5th Terrace and that's where we are. Again, forgive me the size.

If you've received the files before you can see. The interesting thing about this neighborhood is as I said a lot of the original houses that are the older ones and frankly, mostly the ones closer to the railroad tracks are that original flat roof simple look. Most of the ones that are further from the tracks are different. Lots of different styles. Right across the street from us is actual commercial building. Some of you may have been to the spa that's in that commercial building. There are other commercial buildings in the neighborhood as well. So the neighborhood is really quite mixed. It's really only to the east of us that you get back to those nineteen fifties look small houses. This is a top down view of the house.

Most of these pictures were taken by the seller's realtor about a year ago. So the vegetation may not be exactly what you're seeing, but it's pretty close. On the right is Northeast 5th Terrace, and on the top would be Northeast 2nd Avenue. The driveway is Chicago brick, which would imply that it's a little redder than it looks. It's slightly redder than it looks, but it is somewhat yellowish red to be honest.

Everything you're seeing on that is probably from the last thirty or forty years. The original 1951 house is kind of hidden under there because the bulk of the house is is a normal a traditional roof. I can't remember what you call it, but, you know, an angled roof. That was put in back in the seventies or eighties. The other flat roofs that you see on the right side and the lower left, those were put in again dozens of years ago.

In the upper right, there is a nice pergola that was put in ten years ago. So I don't know if if any of you guys were still on the board ten from ten years ago, but that's when that was done. On the upper left is a shed. There's a little roof over a shed. That's gonna get removed so we can put that addition off to the left there. You'll see that a little better as we go do a little walk around. This is the view from the street. So substantially, this is the only real view from the street into the house. Everything else is blocked by that hedging and woods that are that are there. So the front door, small front door, it's actually a very small house when you look at it from this angle.

It's it's just a small rec very deep rectangle. This is the left side. This is where the garbage pails are and the HVAC. So this is kinda I call it back of the house even though it's the side. It's the it's the part that really no one sees. There's a door into the kitchen here, but there's a generator in the background. This is the ugly the ugly side of the house. This is the true back of the house, and this is where the addition's gonna go. You can see that shed that I referred to. The addition isn't gonna take the full width of what you see.

It's gonna take most of the width of what you see is covered by that angled roof. So imagine a rectangle pointing toward us that covers those two windows and comes toward us about 26 feet. That's what's gonna be there. And, again, the plans will make that a little clearer. This is the west side of the house. You can see that pergola. It actually opens and closes in the rain allegedly. Haven't used that yet, but that's the patio that was put in ten, eleven years ago. This is where the I'm standing where the pool would be. Now, again, forgive me if this isn't the most visible things in the world, and I'm not gonna be an expert and I'll and and zoom in here.

But what we're planning on doing is opening that south wall, removing the there's a patio in the back, which is inconsequential, but it's it's just paved area in the back. And there's also some work we need to do. You can see little orange indications on the left and the south and the lower left. We we had to remove some of the existing windows. A couple we're removing because we're gonna repurpose them into the addition, and the one on the mid left, we're gonna turn into a door.

And that's so we have a door to get out to the pool. This is, I'll say, an artist's view of what this will look like when it's done. So you saw from the picture a couple pictures ago that normal yard. Now we're gonna have that pool out there, and you can walk out the door to get to the pool or you can walk out through the existing pergola patio. But the idea is that it's, you know, a relatively narrow long pool for a relatively narrow long house.

Right? So it it complements each other. And this other artist artist view also just shows you not only the pool, but the new addition on your right extending the house. So what was a shoebox shaped house is now a very long shoebox shaped

house. And

this is the site plan showing in blue kind of all the new stuff. Right? The addition on the bottom, the pool on the left. We're actually hoping to get an outdoor shower just outside the addition, so you can use that before or after pool. But other than that, that's really the heart of what we're doing.

Here's the elevations. The east elevation, the the dirtiest side of the house, you you could see that the addition is on your left. The nice side of the house, you can see the addition is on the right. And the we've tried to basically be consistent with the windows and doors with what it used to be and what it's going to be. The view on the left is the view from the south.

Again, this is really not gonna be seen by anybody because it's hidden by the neighbor's fence. But if you could jump over the neighbor's fence and stand there, this is what you would see. And the view from the street, which is the one on the right, the only difference between what is there now and what would be there in the future is you can see the little wall of the outdoor shower on the right. You really can't see this from the street because there's bushes in the way, so you can't get that avid but if the bushes weren't there, that's what you'd see had changed in the house is that the outdoor shower wall is now visible. And far be it to omit the really technical stuff is the civil engineer went through and said, well, if you're putting in a pool, if you're adding an addition, you're remove you're reducing the amount of space for rainwater.

So we wanna make sure we're being conservative here. Even though the house as it exists has never flooded, it is basically at street level. This is not on a hill. Right? So I know when you look at the several engineering regulations in town, there's a desire that the the houses are elevated.

There's an awful lot of houses in this town that are not elevated, right, that are at street level. And so we have that challenge of what are we gonna do to make sure that if we're gonna cover more of the surface area, we're not going to create a problem that isn't that doesn't exist now. So our civil engineer has designed drainage which would go in the West yard and under the driveway so that we have an additional capacity to capture rainwater and basically wouldn't be issuing water out onto the street any more than happens today. And frankly, it doesn't happen today. I don't know if you remember last summer, we had a couple of days of really heavy rain.

I'm sure that's happened more in the past, but I've only been here two years. So that was the heaviest period I saw. And there is a little water running down the street in front of the house, but the land the the rain on our lot doesn't go into the street, and the rain in the street doesn't go under our lot. So that's the way it works today. We're trying to make it better than that and certainly not worse than that. So that's the idea of doing all of this storm water drainage work in advance so that we don't have a problem in the future. Questions or comments?

We will get to those after the staff makes its presentation.

Sounds good. Thank you.

K. Is this on? Okay. For the record, I'm Katharina Pellavoda, senior historic preservation planner. K. This request is for 202 Northeast 5th Terrace. The structure and the property is located in historic Delaeda Park Historic District. The request is for the construction of a 718 square foot one story addition to the rear of the contributing structure. Including that is the construction of a swimming pool to the west side of the property and other ground improvements.

Okay. Just gonna go

over a brief history of the property.

That's three out of seven.

I've got one more to go.

The property

is located within the locally designated Delaeda Historic Park Historic District and currently contains contributing nineteen fifty one one story masonry vernacular style single family residence. According to the original building cards, the structure is CVS block with a stucco exterior and has gable and flat roofs. There is veneer brick elements along the northeast corner of the structure where the carport once existed, and then the existing windows are a mixture of single hung and block glass styles. There were minor modifications made to the structure in 1988, which included a slab of the screen enclosure to the northwest corner of the residence and a small addition in the rear of the corner the southeast corner. Okay.

So here we can see an aerial. It's on the corner of Northeast 2nd Avenue and Northeast 5th Terrace. Okay. This is an aerial

the existing

structure. We see the front elevation. This is a front elevation. We're gonna get to it later in the report, but this specifically is highlighting the bronze frame windows and doors as well as the the I think it's gray tint glass. K. This is the east side elevation,

west side,

southwest in the rear, and then the full rear elevation. Okay. Here we have a survey, so you can see the existing structure on-site along with some pavers. The existing site plan is pretty similar. No real changes here. Okay. So the proposed site plan, we can see the addition in red. The original structure the original structure is in blue, and then we can see the proposed swimming pool on the on the west hand side. Okay. So these are the existing floor plans along with the proposed.

On the existing, you can see there's a small shed in the rear of the structure. If I go back, you can probably see it a little bit better in here. It's tiny in blue. But that's to be removed to accommodate the addition along with partial partial area of the south wall. K. So here we have the existing and proposed front elevations. There are no proposed changes. Here we see the east side where you can see where the addition is. This is the west side. There is a minor change with a window becoming a door.

I know Mark previously mentioned that and we can kind of get into that a little bit later as well. And then we can see the addition in the rear of the property. Okay. So this is the existing versus proposed south south rear addition. So we can see the elevations completely changed because the the new addition that's in the rear.

This is the roof plan, and these are the proposed materials. So they including with the ground improvements, they will be doing travertine. I think this is travertine on there. Barb travertine for the pool deck. And then the the the pool will be fenced in with the black aluminum fence so we can see the different examples that they have on there.

The addition will match the the original structure in color. Here you can see at the bottom, there's two different paint colors. One, it's I guess the orange is a very specific mix, So there's no specific name for it. So we just had that on there just so you could see the color matches for the the edition. Okay.

So these are excerpts from the secretary of the interior standards from the staff report. So we did note that the proposed addition is complementary to the existing structure. And the modifications according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for additions, they can be considered appropriate for the structure. And they wouldn't have a negative effect with on the historic structure as well as the historic district. Okay.

With regards to the windows and doors, I previously mentioned the existing structure did contain bronze frames window and some gray tint. Based off of the design and the style of the structure, we did review it. And the gray tint as well as the bronze frames were considered appropriate visual compatibility for the the actual structure. So normally, we do white frame windows with clear tint. But specifically for this one, after our analysis, we decided that this is actually appropriate for the structure.

So their proposal when they switch out windows is actually to use the bronze frame with the gray glass to match what's existing on the structure. However, because there is a change to what's usually used within historic structures when it comes to windows, we did note here that the board will need to make a determination whether or not the addition and the windows are considered appropriate. Okay. We did note the east side of the wall did include a window. Let me see if I can go back.

This one, there's two things. Okay. So the east side did contain a window. However, with regards to solids to voids and proportion of windows, we did have a minor concern that this was a blank wall. So the board will need to determine whether or not the standards with regard to proportion of windows and solids to voids would be appropriate.

Okay. Then going back to

see.

Okay. Think I have another. Okay. Okay. So highlighted here are the Secretary of the Interior Standards for rehabilitation that apply to this particular application and all of these are covered within the staff report. These are the visual compatibility standards that also apply. They're highlighted in yellow which are also discussed in the report. These are your certificate of appropriateness findings. And these are the site plan technical items for the applicants. That concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Anybody from the public who has some thoughts that they'd like to share with us at this time? This is your opportunity. Don't everybody come up at once. Okay. I guess we now move on to the rebuttals. Does the applicant have any rebuttals from the staff report? No. Okay. And None for Michelle? Nothing? Well, guess we'll go to the board then. Anybody wanna start us out? I I think Carol should start us out on this one. I'll start.

Yeah.

I think it was a very tasteful addition, and I feel like you met the criteria set forth by the secretary of the interior standards and the LDRs. And I appreciate the addition being done without any requests for variances and things like that, but I think you are also you have the benefit of a large piece of land and so you had some room to work with

and that's it. Vlad? Well I have a

question

actually. I have a question to Michelle I guess, or

to you. Katharina.

Yeah. The I know that the idea is when you you when you add create an addition, you're not support you're supposed to create some sort of difference between the new and the old. And the way it was resolved here was a tiny little step back of the wall.

Correct. Yes.

But the roof actually continued.

Correct. Yes.

So I'm I'm wondering, you know, does that become the typical answer? I I start I start to think it's it's kind of irrelevant because everything else is there and just this little almost a mistake looking thing. If there's a better way to do it. In conjunction with the fact that doing that actually, in my opinion, removed an important feature of the Mhmm. Of the existing building was the was the corner window. That's pretty typical to that. I have it in my house too and it's pretty unique. Mhmm. So I would I would actually suggest if there's a possibility. I wouldn't mind using that.

I mean, if you maintain the window, and I I mean, I don't give solution, but the goal would be to use that feature, keep that, and then create a break. And I don't mind if the walls are actually in the same plane since the since the roof is in the same plane anyway. Mhmm. That's number one. The second one is a the the the bronze is really obviously, it's a newer type of finish for for the nineteen sixties, nineteen fifties actually house. And it's okay with me. I understand it's okay. Is it any smarter way that maybe the the fan should be browns as well or doesn't matter? I mean, where where the black comes from? Okay. I know it's standard, but

Yeah.

But it's Okay. A standard finish. There any way I mean, does it matter really? Not to be honest, it doesn't matter to me. I'm curious Okay. A little bit.

So the fencing does match. The the bronze frame, it's like a bronze black. The aluminum fence actually does match the doors and the window. So everything is kind of cohesive. Going back to what you mentioned about, there's like a slight a yeah, part within the wall.

That is typical with additions for historic preservation. It's specifically it's not something that all architects do. But it's when you ask for an addition to not specifically duplicate or be identical to a structure, it's up to the architect's interpretation on how they do it. And it's something that a professional would know that a layman probably wouldn't see. So if someone's walking around the house, any person off the street would probably just assume like they may not even see it.

But to professionals like us, we can see that and say that's an addition and it's not original to the structure. There are other ways that you can differentiate an addition. But like I said, it just kind of depends on what the architect decides. But the little it's appropriate.

So it doesn't bother you that the window is gone.

Vlad, if you can just come up to your microphone. Oh, sorry.

I thought I'm screaming. Okay. You know, I I think there's a little bit of a missed opportunity there because you could create that separation between the new and the old by keeping maybe with a serious recess there, the window, not lose that feature and and and resolve the the comfrey because the roof is still line up. So it's not even really a serious difference between the two. I know we do that to to not to change, you know, to be able to finish the two different material at different times

Mhmm.

To create a break. But in this case, I think you can use something else. I mean, maybe there's even an idea of tile for the shower area or something else. I I think it's a little like a fake solution. Just that little step back. That's all.

May I ask a clarifying question just to be clear that this is the window you're talking about? Yes. Yeah. So what your comment is is that the step back which is about four inches eliminates that corner piece of the window which is important So to the you could definitely talk with the applicant more about that too

to see if Yeah. I don't want to design it. I'm just

No. But I think you're asking an important question about a defining characteristic feature of the building which is that corner window. It's pretty popular during the mid century. So the owner or his agent, I would suggest you talk with them a little more about that.

If I may point out that window is actually moving to the addition. So the addition is gonna have that same corner window. Maintain that Yeah. At some point. Feature will be preserved.

Okay. Alright. But Will be the feature will be

Replicated. Relocated. Thanks. Relocated? Replicated?

I mean,

Whatever word we mean. It's your So we won't lose that feature.

Well, you are, but that's I'm not gonna you know, generally speaking, the the I have no problem with the addition. It's very nice. The result is very elegant and and works well. I just think it's a little bit of a missed opportunity.

Did you want to hear from the applicant with regard to the roofline?

Well, it it's flat. I mean, it's continuous. There's no break or anything like that. That's that makes sense, to be honest with you, because of Okay. Roof construction and everything. It's not, like Alright. Complicating it. So I think I'm okay with it.

John? I'm good with

Is this?

Well, I think that

was a good point about the window, the corner window. But they're keeping it. So I think in in the overall scheme of things, it is it's still remaining with within the architectural design language. Overall, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with the windows being the the bronze and the the blank facade on the east side that was mentioned. I'm okay with that. You don't really see that from the street. So overall, I'm in favor.

No. I'm in favor too. I I just I just I just I

missed But those are good questions.

But you always see the little things that Yeah.

I think

someone has missed So it's it's great that

you say that.

Peter? Yes. I think this is a well thought out modest request. I am curious about how long the process has taken since it is a small revision. If someone could speak to that. When was the application first submitted?

Michelle, could you double check that for us? The applicant submitted had a round of TAC comments. I think this was one round or two?

I think was two.

Two rounds of TAC comments. They resubmitted their most recent submittal three weeks ago?

Three weeks ago.

Three weeks ago. And then we prepared it for the board.

So the whole process, when

did they She's looking

So it just as a note for future applications, staff reports coming to the board, we are considering putting that timeline on the agenda so that the board can see that or maybe as an attachment or something like that.

I think that would be helpful.

Because we explained to our applicants in our pre app process that an application can get to a board even with variances, waivers, relocation which all require, well not waivers but require notice, public notice. They can get to the board in six weeks with a flawless or near flawless middle. If an application comes through with a round of TAC comments, we turn our comments around typically two to three weeks. The code allows us thirty days. There's federal, I'm sorry, requirements for review that are now in place that we have to adhere to.

So an applicant gets the comments and then it's in their court. Okay. And they have to respond within sixty days. If they don't respond within sixty days and application is administratively withdrawn, they can ask for an extension to that time period. So a lot of times it's back in the design professionals hands which now it's their schedule not ours. So you might see an application that took nine months to get to the board because the applicant took eight months to return, you know, or seven months to return the submittal.

That's understandable. Mhmm. Yeah. Just because this is pretty straightforward and it looks like it's not a huge request.

She's trying to get it to load. Perhaps by the

time I don't I don't wanna delay anything, but

I like the time. If it she pulls it up by the time you're done with this item, we'll let you know.

Ezra, you're up.

You're good? Everything has been said that should be said. Thank you.

May I ask a couple questions? In terms of the setbacks, I may have missed it in the presentation or in the staff report, but where do we stand particularly with the addition in the pool?

What is the

they May I ask this?

The set they're all it's in compliance with all of the setbacks?

Yes, sir. There's no variances

or Yeah.

Know I

know they're okay.

They're well within the setbacks based

In on what I this proposal, they chose to place the pool in front of the home, so it's between the home and the adjacent Northeast 2nd Avenue right of way, and it does meet the requirements for setbacks.

That's what I wanted to hear.

Yes.

Thanks. The applicant talked about the filtration and exfiltration. I'm just wondering if it's not going into the street and the street's not coming in, is there a connection to the storm water system?

No. It's just going to the ground.

Kindly come up.

Sorry. I I won't pretend to be a civil engineer. But what the engineering firm has proposed and Patrick, with the city engineer, has reviewed is drainage going down into the ground to the west of the pool. So any excess storm water that would have normally been taken into the Western yard now has a place to run further underground. So it doesn't go into the storm water system, it just goes deeper into the dirt. Okay.

So if I may just ask for my own purpose, is that an, exfiltration trench or is it percolating through natural

It's civil drawing that will this morning, that will depict depict the I got water. You. Thanks.

Could you just say your name and address? My name

is Tyler. My address?

Yeah. First, last name, and can be your business address.

And the address is 202 Northeast 5th Terrace.

There's also a question as to whether you were sworn in.

I don't know. Do I need to be?

It's best that you be.

Okay. You

can leave your head on.

Okay. Please raise

your right hand by the authority vested me, the notary of the state of Florida. Do you swear to affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Thank you, Tyler.

We have a professional engineer created a civil drawing to keep. Obviously, we're adding a pool and an existing structure on a property wherein without those, you'd have a natural green space. So permeable and impermeable substrate is obviously gonna be taken up now. So we have created a way to keep our storm water on our property without going out into the road and that is just about as simple as it can be. We're keeping our own storm water on our property and draining into the storm drain through a civil engineer. No. Very, very qualified.

Okay. Thank you.

Are you ripping up the driveway to do that?

Oh, we are gonna pull it up and put it right back. Okay. Yes.

Now that that's been brought up, we have to talk about that. And it's noted in the staff report. I'm sorry but we do have to address. If the driveway is removed it needs to be set five foot off of the property line. If the driveway stays in its current condition and is not removed, it can remain where it's at. But it does go right to the edge of the property and the city engineer is gonna make that comment at the time of permit. So just please be prepared for that.

And that's fine. And we've already actually been speaking with them that we may move the actual drain just off of the driveway where it wouldn't make a difference whether it's in the center of the driveway

or The city drain.

Yeah, correct.

Yeah, thank you for letting me address that with the applicant.

Thank you. Thank you for bringing it up. I had one final question for the applicant, if if I may. We we appear are not empowered to look at your landscape plans, but I would like to ask one question. I mean, and it it really is that as you drive up Northeast 2nd, that is just a green wall.

Yes.

Right? And I'm just wondering if you gave any thought to the fact that you were doing all of this great work to the house, and it is a historic structure, whether made any sense for the public to be able to see it from the street. I'd just like your comments on that.

At this point in time we weren't planning on changing that. I will digress for one second as you've asked the question. What hasn't been mentioned is one of the things that that elongated our process is we were told a few months ago we have to do a five foot dedication of the Western land. So even the land that that long hedge is on is gonna be turned into city land. So it won't necessarily be our decision what that wood line ends up looking like.

So that's I'm not trying to punch it into the future but there's a little bit of an unknown about how much landscape changes there'll be. We at this point aren't planning on a bunch of landscape changes. I won't criticize or comment on decisions that were made ten or fifteen years ago about the extent of vegetation on this property which is I think anybody would say is considerable. On the other hand, having a pool there, I really don't want people on the sidewalk staring right through a pool. So there is a balance there between can you look and see the house?

Sure. That's great. Certainly from Northeast South Terrace, you can see the house. And I agree from Northeast 2nd Avenue you really can't see the house. It's not the only house that has that characteristic but that's a long way of saying we don't know. But the site dedication which actually we had to go back and redo our plans because of that need to give up five feet of territory on the western edge, that would also complicate your question.

Okay. Well, Thank you for giving us that candid answer. Just, part of historic preservation, at least in my mind, is that you see the results of it. And to have that hidden behind a fence, which I understand for privacy and noise and so forth is a consideration. Thank you for answering that. Okay. I think we're ready to Yeah. Obtain a motion.

Mister chair, I'd like to move approval of the certificate of appropriateness 2024Dash225 for the property located at 202 Northeast 5th Terrace Delaeda Park Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in land development regulations. Second.

Call the roll.

Is there a Craig? Yes. John Miller? Yes. Peter Dwyer?

Yes.

Chris Kopezes? Yes. Vlad Dimitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. Jim Chart?

Yes. Thank you very much. Let's move on to file number 20231. 'two, I believe. Any ex parte conversations?

Oh, he's on the passenger next. Drove past the floor.

Okay. Drove past the None? Just drove past

the floor.

Okay. Peter?

Yes. Ex parte? No ex parte communication on this one. Okay.

None. None. And none for me. Katrina, I apologize for switching the names. Well, you both started at the same time. Can you introduce into the record?

Yes. For the record, Michelle Hewitt Planner, and this is 333 North Swinton Avenue, COA 2023 Dash 102 for a COA demolition and variance request. We have the architect here to present on behalf of the owner.

Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Pablo Solis with Steve Seward Architecture. And as was mentioned, this is 333 North Swinton Avenue. What we are proposing for the property is an addition on the rear of the house.

And in the rear of the house, we're also contending with the land dedication along the alley. So what you see on the screen is the Main Street in the left side. In the center is the alleyway. In Blue Crosshatch is our property. And along the alleyway with that two foot land dedication, we have along the way in red, marked in red, you'll see some of the oops.

Sorry. The buildings that you see in red are existing buildings along the alleyway. And as you can see, the alleyway is only one block long. Each of the buildings in red are marked because they are within five feet from the from the alleyway. Some of the buildings are right on the alleyway, not even a foot or two in.

And all of those in red are a very tight along creating a tight area along the alleyway. For our property, we are doing the two foot dedication because that is required. And with the two foot dedication, we need to have our 10 foot setback from that line. With the 10 foot setback, the client would be losing a buildable floor area, 70 square feet of buildable floor area. Various requests that we are asking for is to reduce the setback from a 10 foot required setback to an eight foot setback so that it's the eight feet plus the two foot giving us 12 feet from the alleyway.

The hardship that currently exists for the property owner is that all of the other neighbors don't have that setback requirement Even if they were to give a two foot dedication, the building that sits there, because it's a historic property, can't be moved, can't be demolished. So over time, if anybody tries to improve, their building is right on the alleyway, and if they are to meet the 10 foot setback, they would have to demolish that or move the whole building in to meet the requirement. So at this point, for our client to have a 10 feet plus the two foot dedication is a hardship, like I mentioned, losing 70 square feet. So we are requesting the eight foot rear setback on the property. If you look at the images on the left, you could see the buildings that are along that alley and how close they are to the alley line.

Along with that dedication, the rear prop I'll move to the next image. This is the site of the property, and the addition is on the rear of the property. As you can see, it comes right up to the to the setback line that we're asking for at eight feet. We have a pool, and because of the floor area, the pool is a small small pool, and it's tucked up against the building so that we can conserve and try to keep some of the green space. The paving in the rear around the pool deck is all pervious pervious material that allows the water to percolate and the driveway as well would allow the water to percolate.

The driveway in the front, we are creating a new driveway. The existing driveway that is there is a worn out gravel kind of driveway, so it's really not clear where the boundaries are. And it also was sitting right on property line. So we are creating a new driveway to have the proper setbacks, the proper distances from the from the building from the property line. All the pavement, all of the pool, all of that meets the setback requirements.

In this image, you can see the larger scale floor plan where the pool is is tucked up against the building. And on the upper right hand corner is the existing building. The items in red are part of the buildings that we are going to be removing to be able to connect the addition to the building. The elevations, one of the things that that we have to do is because of the the FEMA flood elevation and the Crown Road, the building sits very low, so we have to raise the building up. What you see in the gray shaded is the original front elevation, and then the left elevation is the proposed building sitting higher than the current location.

So that means that the roof surface, the roof trusses, the beam are going to be removed and the building is going to be raised as well. And then the roofline is going to be recreated to be just like it was sitting at a higher elevation. Along with that, we are raising the grate around the building so that the relationship of the front elevation keeps the same relationship, and the berming allows the water to run off from the building. And we have exfiltration trenches around the property to catch all that water coming off and and and deal with the with the water. Basically, the building is being raised about a foot, and you'll see in the other elevations.

And

this is the roofline that we are going to be taking the existing existing roofline roofline and and recreating it in the same shape and the same form that it was before, new material, and then the connection between the existing and the addition in the rear of the property. The rendering show that the height of the building sits a little bit higher, so it has the same relationship with the front stoop that it had as it had before. It's just sitting higher on the on the property line. The pool, you can see the pool on the image on the right, and it has it's set in between the buildings. So in the rear, what you see is the back of the house.

You don't necessarily see the pool. From the front of the house, there are two existing tall hedges on the left and right that are the neighbor's hedges, and they're about seven feet tall, so they frame in the front elevation. And at this point, we would like to discuss the racing of the of the building, and Steve Sievert will step in to discuss that part.

Steve Sievert with Steve Sievert Architecture addresses 1010 Gateway in Boynton.

Mr. Sievert, were you sworn in?

Yes I was.

Okay great.

Thank you.

I did stand because we knew we were splitting this. Pablo is presenting the variance and the COA. Everybody cringes when you talk about demolition of an historic property, so I'm here to talk about that and and explain why we're proposing it and how we got to here. And also, before you ask the question, explains why our timeline's so long. So originally, we came in and we the the existing house has a very low headroom.

We're showing you some graphics in the bottom left of that corner to say that the majority of the house is at, six foot eight now, and some of it is seven nine or something like that. So it's not your standard headroom. So we came in earlier asking to lower the floor by leaving the outside as is and keeping everything historic and intact, lowering the floor would give us a reasonable headroom that we could occupy with. Then we had to go before the DSMG board for that and Patrick. That committee not only declined that, but they sent us back and asked us to do a custom study.

They called it a glass box study where you build a glass wall around the property, you have a hundred year flood and see where the water comes. Anyway, the result of that study requires us to elevate the floor, not lower it. When you elevate exasperate the low headroom condition. Okay? So we are actually less than six eight in a large portion of the existing home.

We presented that to Katharina and Michelle, and they said, well, historically when we do partial demolition, we're worried about what is remaining. So I'm here to say that we've brought an expert contractor with experience who's going to be doing the project and partially demoing a lot of historic custom building reinforcing, even to the point he was sharing with me where he's dug large holes in the center of the floor, poured wood dead men into there, and braced onto that to give them soundness in the structure while they piece take apart what needs to be taken apart. So we're proposing to reinforce the exterior first, pour the floor to give us some more reinforcing. That's gonna be elevated. That's gonna tie into the walls and give them better stability above the exterior elevation.

Then we're going to brace the walls and tie it to that concrete floor, and we're going to piece by piece take apart the existing roof. We're gonna pour a new 16 inch tie beam? Yes. 16 inch tie beam on the old wall, which becomes the tie beam on the new house as well, and then we're gonna reconstruct reconstruct the profile of the roof in trusses and members that meet today's building code for the win code. We couldn't reuse the old roof and put it on there because we don't do that.

So we are replacing, but in the end result and what Pablo was showing you before and after and after being higher was simply saying we're keeping the building intact. After we've poured the tie beam, we're gonna and after the roof is on and after this building is now certifiably structural sound, then we're gonna modify and raise the door and window elevations to the new floor as well. In the end, you're gonna see the same building. The only thing that changes is the grade line today in relation to windowsills and doors is where it is today in the end will be four inches lower. We're going up 16 inches, but we're only elevating the grade 12 inches because of some water flow issues and taking care of drainage.

So I'm here as the architect owner of the company to say, we never like doing demo in historic buildings, and I'm presenting that portion for the board to say we thought about it a lot. We spent a lot of time on it. We worked with we worked with your staff, and and Michelle and the team felt that now we were at the level where we can bring it to you. So I'm gonna turn it back to Pablo to finish his presentation on the COA piece.

So as you can see, this is the, elevations of the existing building the way it is. The shape of the building is not in good condition, but all the materials are gonna be cataloged. The trim work is gonna be cataloged and and be able to recreate it. On the left side of the house is that porch behind the chimney that was enclosed at one time with with some brick surfaces. We're going to open that up and restore the original porch that was there and get rid of the brick that was added and only exists in that one area.

In the materials, we are going to, like I said, catalog what is there, what the surface materials are, textures, colors, different types of detail, and be able to recreate that. If you see the base of the building, it has kind of a thickened plinth. We are also going to raise that. When the building gets raised, we're gonna raise the plinth line so that the relationship of the plinth is exactly like you see it to the bottom of the window. It'll be a foot higher because of the elevation, but with the burning, it will keep that same kind of height that exists on the building right now.

You can see up across the soffit line that the wall has a curvature curvature to it. And those are details that we are cataloging so that we can recreate those same kind of details back on the building. The brick below is what we're getting rid of to restore the original conditions. Conditions. The corner the corner window that you see in the bottom right image, we're going to recreate that same exact corner with new windows, new materials.

It's five five vertical sections in the front and five vertical in the height as well. So we're gonna recreate that but with two windows because of the modern sizes and the modern limitations. This is the interior and

you can

see the

man standing there on the Sir, what? That's the height.

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but that was your time. It's up to the board discretion if you wanna give him a little bit to wrap up.

How much more do you have?

This is the last page, just the streetscape. So we're pretty much complete.

Take your time.

Thank you for the extra time. As you can see the building sits a little bit taller, the grate is a little bit taller, relationship with the adjacent houses. It's not sitting any higher than the other houses, so we're trying to preserve that same scale, the same characteristic. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

We

will have public comment. Okay. Have you been sworn in? No, no, you can't now. You have to wait till the staff presentation.

After they go, there will be a time for public comment that you could come

up. Thanks.

Good. Okay. Once

again, Michelle Hewlett Planner and this is 333 North Smith Avenue for a COA demolition and variance request. Here we have an aerial with the subject property outlined in red with North Clinton Avenue to the west. Some brief history. The contributing property is zoned within the Old School Square Historic Arts District and is within the locally and nationally designated Old School Square Historic District. The nineteen forty six structure was designed in the masonry vernacular style with minimal traditional architectural details, making it a modest example of domestic architecture from the time period.

The city building yellow card for the subject structure indicates an addition was added to the rear of the home in 1955. The one story ten forty seven square feet concrete block structure has a stucco exterior and a hip and gable roof with minimal roof eave overhangs. Windows include metal casement, picture windows and Dallas windows. Metal awnings exist over most windows and the front door has full height glass block sidelights linking the door with a fluted wood door surround. Just going to go through some pictures here.

So this is the front or west elevation. This space is North Swinton Avenue. This is the side or northwest elevation. We can see the existing conditions of the structure. This is the rear or east elevation. This space is the alley. You can see some of the existing windows and awnings on the structure. And this is the side or southwest elevation. Okay. Here we have a survey with the existing building footprint highlighted in blue and then the property line outlined in red.

There is currently, as previously mentioned by architect, there is a driveway also that exists on the site, but it's partially grown over and in disrepair. And here we have the proposed site plan. Again, blue is the existing structure and then the red is the proposed addition. And then at the bottom right corner or southeast corner, there is the pool highlighted in the lighter blue. The request before the board is for a certificate of appropriateness for a 1,005 square feet one story addition to the rear of the existing structure, exterior modifications, and ground level improvements.

The overall renovated home will contain 2,052 square feet total. A variance to reduce the required 10 feet rear setback to eight feet and demolition to remove the roof structure to increase finished square elevation to minimum requirements and to increase the overall building height has also been requested. So here's that variance request here. At the rear, I'll go into more detail when I get to the variance section of the presentation. Regarding ground level improvements and the for parking purposes, the circular driveway current that currently exists on the site is to be reconfigured to a single apron driveway.

The proposed design is anticipated to create a safer parking and residential vehicular use area with vehicles being able to exit the property in a forward manner. Other ground level improvements include the pool, which is currently meeting all of the required setbacks and LDR requirements. And then there is fencing proposed along the property within the front setback. The proposed fencing is to be three feet three feet high aluminum white big fencing. And then beyond that, it's proposed to be eight feet high white aluminum fencing.

There's no concern with the proposed material color or placement of the fencing. Going through elevations, here we have the front elevation. Again, the space is North Swinton Avenue. On the top is the existing front or west elevation where you can see how the building is currently configured. And then on the bottom is the proposed front or west elevation.

The items that we've highlighted in red are the the roof, which is proposed to go from asphalt shingle to metal standing seam in a mill finish, and that's for all of the roofing on the structure. The windows are proposed to be replaced and to match the same dimension size as what's currently there. There is a new front door design proposed but to be located in the same position. As previously mentioned by the architect, all of the stucco banding around the base of the structures elevated to match the to keep the same appearance of the existing structure with the removal or the demolition of the existing roof for that increased build wall height and then replacement of the roof. And then on the left there is that porch that's proposed to be reopened.

Here we have the proposed side or south elevation And you can see the addition relative to the existing structure. Again, this is to the rear of the existing structure. You can see the pattern of the windows is proposed to remain the same. And then that raised stucco banding to match to keep the same appearance as what's currently there. And then we piloted the roofing and then just for a visual, the removed portions of the wall to increase the height to meet the FEMA requirements.

The proposed some of the proposed window and door openings on the new addition are somewhat different than the openings that exist on the septic structure size and mutton patterns. The proposed single pane window style that exists and large single pane glass door openings are more commonly used in modern or mid century modern architectural styles, which are seen on some of the windows that are proposed. Additionally, it is noted that with respect to the rhythm of solids to voids, overall the proposal can be deemed compliant with the standard, with the exception of the rear or east elevation, which faces the Northsouth Alley where one horizontal fixed pane window is proposed on a large blank wall. So this is the this elevation on the screen is the other side, the north side of the structure where you can see some of the new windows that are proposed on the existing structure along with the new windows on the addition. And then here is the rear elevation where we kind of talk about that large expansive blank wall on the back of the singular window, but this is the rear of the structure.

This space is the alley. And then here we have a rendering of the front elevation where you can see the retained overall appearance of the structure. This is a rendering from an aerial perspective where you can see that addition in the back relative to the existing structure in the front and that new configured parking on the site in the pool. So here we have a staff report excerpt from the Secretary of Interior Standards section. The structure currently does not meet the minimum finish for elevation requirements.

So the applicant has needed to increase the structure's over roof height. The existing finish for elevation is 21.09 feet. The existing average kind of road is 20.13 feet. And the proposed finish for elevation is 21.53 feet, an overall increase of 0.54 feet. And the structures mean move height will increase from 31.59 feet to 32.95 feet, an increase of 1.36 feet.

It is also noted that the applicant has submitted a request to the development services management group, DSMG, as previously mentioned, to allow the finished elevation to be reduced. But the request was not approved. Thus they have chosen this method to meet the requirements of FEMA. As mentioned again previously in my presentation that the window door styles and patterns are different than that of the masonry vernacular style of the home specifically since the home possesses many more traditional architectural detailing with simple window styles, limited roof overhangs and glass block front door sidelights. Here are some staff report excerpts for the vision compatibility standard section.

The proposal includes metal roofing standing seam in the mill finish. While it has been utilized in throughout city of Delray Beach, it's been more recently utilized for new construction or historically with wood frame structures. Given the city of Delray Beach Delo Card notes that a shingle roof was original to the structure, consideration could be given to the use of metal shingle roof. And then regarding the addition, it is located to the least public side of the building. It is not located in front of the established wall plane of the building, and it's been designed so that the basic form and character of the building remain intact if the addition is ever removed.

However, as previously mentioned, the window and doors could be seen as introducing new architectural elements from another architectural style. And so with their overall CO application addition, they have the demolition request that's required for the removal of the roof. This is to ensure the security and stability of the structure while the roof is removed. So here are the demolition findings that the applicant and staff used to analyze the request. And here are some key points from the demolition analysis.

The staff and the board have determined the importance of ensuring the structural stability of walls once the roof is removed. They have engaged a contractor as mentioned by architect to develop a plan to protect the structure from low pitched of being subject to structural damage. The structure is unique in that it was designed in the masonry vernacular style with minimal traditional architectural detailing. So it's one of the few unique pieces here that is that exists here in Delray Beach. Overall rehabilitation of the structure is expected to have a positive effect upon the Old School Square historic district and the city as a whole.

Along with the demolition request, there was variance request for the rear setback to go from the required 10 feet to the eight feet in response to the required right of way dedication. Again, here is the image here showing showing that requested eight foot rear setback variance. These are the variance findings that the staff and the applicant used to analyze the request. And then here are some key notes about the overall variance request. This is to facilitate the construction of the one story rear addition.

Given the location of the existing home on the lot, the proposed addition can only be situated to the rear of the home. Given the small 50 feet width of the lot, the existing increased front setback and the two feet alley right over dedication, it could be determined that special conditions and circumstances exist supporting the request. The requested variance could be determined to be necessary to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse modernization of the existing historic structure. Here we have the Secretary of Interior Standards with the highlighted elements that were used to analyze the request on the screen. And the same here for the Visual Compatibility Standards.

And here are the certificate of appropriateness findings that were also utilized to analyze the request. And here are some technical items that will be dealt with after the board. And that concludes my presentation.

I'd like to add one minor thing which Michelle did cover. But the, and I don't know if the applicant has brought them with them tonight but throughout the process and reviewing which obviously you hear what they've been through and looking at the approach for the property. They have engaged your contractor at this point in the process already who has a plan to shore the building once the roof is removed. The demolition request for the roof removal triggers that you know 25% of the structure or more being demolished which is why it was sent, know public notices were sent. So I don't know if they have the professional with them but at the meeting tonight but it's something we have been interacting with that contractor throughout the review process.

Thanks.

Okay. Maybe I think somebody's shaking their head back there that maybe during the rebuttal process that can be answered.

Okay.

Thanks. Now it's time for public comments. Sir, have you

been sworn in?

Yes. Okay. Hello. Plea plea plea plea plea stick with me. I got sick, so I so I so I stutter a little bit. I live next to this property for over thirty thirty some years.

Sir, if you could just state your name

and address My name is Rich Ott, o t t. I live right right next door at 329 North North Swinton Avenue. Thank you. I live next to John and Tacy for over thirty some years. Yes. I do know this property needs help, and I and and I don't doubt that some of the beautiful pictures I'm I'm seeing seeing seeing here look look fantastic. My question is, you're talking about raising the the the the the the the ground up. My ground is barely a foot higher than theirs. So we're bringing it up, so that means that rain off is gonna be coming right over into my property now. If you look up at my property to theirs, mine was built in the sixties.

Yes. It was built in the fifties. My question also is that that we we here in the Del Ray downtown, we kept the the the the look. This house has already been cleaned out. I don't know if anybody knows this, but but it's been stripped from the inside out. There was 25 Christmas trees dropped off this year that somebody dropped in the backyard and put in the house and put all over the yard that I I I personally moved out because I they were gonna it looked like somebody wanted to burn it down. I'm not trying to talk bad about anybody's building. I think doing a good job. I think what you're doing

need to speak to us, sir.

Yes. I think they think they're doing a good job. But but a lot a lot of things I got questions about. The the the house seems very large for that plot of land. We have 75 across one seventy eight five deep is what my house is and their house is. That looks like a very large house, and then drop in a pool right right there. Now I I I I don't have a problem with what we did here in Delray because I love Delray, and I love the the whole the whole neighborhood. You know? My my question is is that the parking we can't get out of Twenton now. How are they gonna get out?

I can't even back out about my my driveway Mhmm. At any time of day. Where where are the where are the parking I mean, they say they're gonna park out front, and they think they're gonna get leeway out and and be able to back in? That that's never gonna happen. My main concern is the drainage. If they raise this up and they're gonna put a house this large across from my house and then drop a pool in that's gonna raise it up, it's all gonna drain into my property. Okay. And that is a very

concern to me. And

I and and I'm not I'm not I'm not I'm not very happy the way the things have been handled, the way this property's been handled. It's been two years that somebody sat on this property. I've had to put $1,800 to have my house tenant for rats and everything else because it was not not taken care of. And now if we are gonna be a historic district, we should make sure it stays historic, and we shouldn't put a mega mansion somewhere it shouldn't belong. Now I'm not saying it can't be built, but I don't think it needs to be as large.

Okay. Any other thoughts? Well, I like I said, I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I'm just saying that I've been there for thirty some years, and I can just tell you. And the alleyway in the back and so forth, it it Tom, who was sitting next to me, is my neighbor. It's so busy back there now. Swinton has gotten so busy. Look what they built across the street at at at Old School Square. I mean, behind the the church. We have 10 new houses there. I mean, where's all this traffic going? Where where is everybody putting this traffic? I can't back out of my driveway at 01:00. I can't back out at 03:00. I can't get in at 04:00.

At at 05:00, forget it, and come across from from from from the to the Publix, come home at 03:00 and try to get across Lake Ida. It doesn't happen. So what are we doing?

Thank you very much for your comments.

Thank you.

The board doesn't typically respond at this point, but it may get addressed during, rebuttal or cross examination by the staff or the applicant.

Pablo, please step up. And Steve, if you could also.

So Excuse

me. Are there any other public comments? Thank you, John. I'm sorry, Bob.

Would be brief.

Approve it. Oh, George Long, 46 North Swift. I was looking at this and that. There's the the the eight foot setback. No question that's a good they need to do that. That's not asking much considering what that alley looks like. I've been around that house. I was given a serious archaeological lecture to six year olds at the Culver Pump School, and I saw that yellow sign, so I walked all around and I looked at it. I don't know what you've got in there with this block area of raised floor. But, anyway and also the that's a lot of trouble for an area that I don't believe is ever gonna flood to to bring that up.

Everybody's looking at this crowd of the road and getting all ups worried about it, and you could have a slope going down to the, to to the intercoastal waterway, taking the water away anyway. But, anyway, it's a lot of trouble. The house needs that needs a lot of work, and I think you should go with it. And I also sorry if I disagree with the neighbors. I I don't also, what about the flooding? Are you you're not raising the ground, are you, around the house? Yeah. Yeah. You are or just the house? Whole thing?

Sir George,

we can have

this I'm sorry, okay.

Mind, I didn't see the flooding issues so you might ask him about that, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Now if the applicant would speak, Assuming there are no more public comments.

Okay, so to address the concern about the water runoff, the civil engineer plan that we have has swales along the left and right side of the property. And, because the house is sitting up high, it contains it in the swale. The swale brings it to the front to the exfiltration trench. Any of the water across the front will also come across to the exfiltration trench. In the rear, we have another exfiltration trench that half of the water would go towards the rear and then to the exfiltration trench, so none of that is ever going to leave the property.

It's all gonna be contained on the property. To address this concern of the driveway, the way the driveway is designed is that originally it was a circular drive to be able to drive in and be able to pull out. But because of the new requirements of distances and minimum widths, we couldn't do that. So we have a single drive in and out. When you pull in, the cars drive into the parking spaces, and they are facing the south side of the of the of the property.

But they're parked two vehicles. And then when they wanna come out, they back out into our back out space, and then they can pull out to the street. So there is no backing out at all. It is like a k turn where you back out, and then you can face forward onto the street to be able

to

exit. And then to address this comment about the tree, the tree that is currently there, it is a large tree, but it is in poor condition. And the landscape architect has a mitigation report and has trees for mitigation as well to eliminate that tree that is there in poor condition and replace it with additional trees. So the landscape plant shows that.

Okay. Okay. Steve, could I ask you to just comment because I'm sure with all of the work you've done around the city, you've run into a similar issue in terms of runoff. As we try to enforce the FEMA standards, is isn't this an issue that many people in Delray are already facing?

It is. Especially near the intercoastal where we have to raise the houses three feet from their neighbors. So, you know, it's even more challenging. But if you remember during my presentation, I I mentioned the building was gonna end up being about four inches taller than it is today, and that's because while we can't build the ground around this, the 16 inches that we'd like to, we can only do 12 to maintain that swale and get that swale to work with our civil engineer to the drainage that we have. The site is designed that all the water that falls on the site remains on the site till it gets into the exfiltration.

But that doesn't stop water from coming onto our site from other sites. We will get water from the road, and we will continue to get water from the neighbors. But some of the we've actually designed for some of that residual water into our exfiltration as well. So this while we are elevating this for FEMA, we're mitigating that by designing a site that doesn't allow the water to go off.

K. While you're up there, do you have any response or any rebuttal to staff report?

No. Staff did a great job. Okay.

Katerina?

Think there was just one thing. Oh, Michelle. You just said Katharina. Sorry. We'll get it, we'll get it.

In the beginning I think there might have been some just talking about what happens if a dedication was to occur along any of the other properties in the alley, that demolition would need to occur if any of the existing buildings on-site. And that wouldn't necessarily be the case. They'd remain as existing nonconformities as any of the new construction or increased square footage we need to comply with those requirements just for clarification. That's

it. Any other thoughts? Let's take it.

I'm sorry I have thoughts.

Oh. For rebuttal.

I encourage the owner who spoke earlier, the first public comment, to reach out to us throughout the process if they're having issues while our role is to review applications, you know, for compliance with the code. One of our roles is to help our residents in historic districts get directed to the appropriate departments when there's issues going on on a site or a neighboring site or whatever. So I encourage him to be empowered to give us a call or shoot an email over to my team and I. As far as the drainage comment, when we see applications come in early in the process that are building pretty much or hardscaping to the envelope, meaning setback, right? The entirety of the buildable area within the setbacks.

We always are asking all applicants to start thinking about drainage now. COA process does not require drainage, landscape plans, photometric. This is single family. Right? So we're the idea is simplifying it, getting it to the board.

We're talking about design. So those site related issues when we see things where there's hardscaping on the entirety of the building envelope, we start having the conversation with the applicant about drainage. Because not everything can percolate when you're doing this. And we've had multiple applicants years ago, probably six years ago is when I started doing this. Didn't know they needed a trench until they got to building permit and then that trench was going to cost them $40,000 Almost killed their project.

So we have them start thinking about now engaging in preliminary drainage plans. Patrick Figuerella, who is one of the TAC reviewers, does courtesy comments which aren't not all have to be addressed at the time of review. Utilities is also doing that review now with the more, you know, close look at what happens with utilities. So while some fill can come into a site and it is happening, we are also looking at and drafting regulations on how are we going to handle that. This is really more of an issue when we're in the flood plain and you can't, you you have a building that you're raising up significantly.

The architect and design team has to figure out how are they going to make sure that building doesn't slide. How are they going to treat the site? So those are just some of the comments I wanna make. This is a swale and an exfiltration trench design for this project which should address any kind of potential runoff happening around the perimeter of the property. The parking is going to, it was redesigned so it can move out of the site in a forward manner.

It was a big piece of our review because of its proximity to Lake Ida Road Intersection which we identify in the staff report as well. But sometimes putting parking in the rear can help alleviate that when you have access to an alley. So those are just some of the things I wanted to just cover in rebuttal from what the member of the public addressed. And I think that's all, thank you.

I appreciate you bringing up that point about public involvement and educating about historic preservation and EPA obviously. Was there public notice in this case? Would the neighbors realize what was happening?

Yes, so a public notice everybody within a 500 foot radius was sent for both the variance and the demolition.

Okay, okay. I think that does it for rebuttals. And we can now go to staff. We can ask the ex parte question.

Did you miss,

did we miss ex parte? I'm sorry, okay. Yeah,

I thought you had done it, okay.

We did that at the beginning. I'm sorry.

No worries. Alright.

To the board. Peter, do you wanna start on this?

Sure. I'm familiar with this project and I think that it was in danger of demolition by neglect. Very bad condition. I was wondering who was gonna grab it and and do something with it. So I'm pleased to see that it's gonna be saved. The demolition will be extensive. Just to set expectations, The work you're gonna do is gonna take down several walls. I mean, you're gonna I don't know how many you'll have standing with the windows and things, but it's gonna look almost like a full demolition from the street based on what I see on the plans on the wall sections. If you wanna So respond,

the design and what we've discussed with the applicant is that the existing walls are to remain. That picture if

you go back You have to right look at the wall section on the plans they've submitted. You'll see that there's new stem wall. There's new block on the stem wall then there's a new tie beam above. So to put the new stuff in, you gotta take out the old.

So I think we should engage the applicant to Yeah. Just talk to the podium.

How the structure will be

Talk a little bit more about that because the way they have

I know the way they're presenting it, but as a builder, I can tell you that it's gonna look almost like a full demolition based on what you're showing on the wall sections.

The stem wall footer is existing. Right. And

that'll stay.

Right. That's gonna stay, and and what we're gonna do is we're gonna pour a new slab with the thickened edge that goes behind the block wall. So the block wall is gonna stay all of it. We are opening the header, taking out the the beam, and putting in a higher beam. So in that sense, that is what is changing. But the walls

So you think you're gonna keep all the walls?

I'm sorry? You think you're

gonna be able to brace up all the walls? Because you

The front wall, the two side walls, yes. The rear is coming off because that's where we're connecting. I'm sorry.

I'll be watching you. Be watching.

I mean to me it looks pretty tricky.

I think the contractor wanted to say something. Yeah.

And I also just wanted to point out that on the screen this the applicant's drawing. What is somewhat misleading in this drawing is that it's showing a section where a window occurs. Right. Right? But the section where the window doesn't occur, the wall is going to continue up with the new beam being placed on top. But we have studied this and so I don't want the, I wanna make sure we're clear that this is not a proposal where walls are coming down.

Right.

That is not the request. The roof is coming off. Openings around the window tops are cutting, being filled in at the bottom, and windows are shifting up vertically on exterior of the home. The exterior stucco base around is coming up, but not the structure of it, the stucco piece of it. And this slab on the interior. So I just wanted to make sure I was really clear because that's how we've understood it. That's the design that's been presented. So we do not expect to drive by this home and have there be no walls which is why the contractor has been engaged

in the project so I think it's important to talk

I'm about glad that you brought it

up, yes.

I just wanted to bring it up and I think it's good to set expectations.

Thank you so much for bringing that up because it has. And that is why we have had elaborate conversations, shown examples of shoring. Was a Palm Beach example that we Right. And why the contractor was engaged so early for sure.

Okay, great. Any others? No, I think that it's a nice project on its merits. I think it it looks to conform with the LDRs, and and it'll be an asset to the neighborhood.

Chris, do you wanna go ahead?

I had a I a question about if the house is being raised at all. I don't know if I was perfectly clear with that. Is the house being raised or is it the house is staying the same and the roof is being raised?

So the roof is coming off. A new slab is being poured inside, and a new So roof is going from the exterior, you're going to be driving by and look at this house and there's gonna be no roof. And then you're gonna see around the entire top perimeter of the house additional wall being built to navigate really this slab that's poured on the interior. So the elevation to meet finished floor is happening on the interior of the house.

I see.

But the outside walls are staying in place.

Outside walls are staying.

There's little addition on the top.

Yes sir.

Okay. Does the applicant wanna address that? Okay.

I think I got it.

Okay. Yeah.

I'm okay with the two foot or the variance in the back for the setback. I think it fits with the character of the street. I I'm okay with the driveway new design. I think it makes sense, especially on a busy road. You don't wanna be backing up into there if you do have to remove that circular driveway. Let's see. It's marked on the plan that there are going to be permeable pavers. Are those have those been selected yet? Or what what's the what permeable paver are you thinking of using?

When when we address landscaping, all the hard surface materials will be selected and we have a couple in mind already that are more open, permeable materials. So they will be like a brick paver, but allow the water to penetrate through it. So we could provide samples to staff once those materials are selected.

Okay. Got that. Appreciate that.

I I was just looking at the landscape plan, and I think there needs to the native requirements need to be double checked on that one. I didn't see as many native trees as I think there should be. Overall, all, I'm in support of the project. I think it's it's in line with the interior standards. So I'm I'm in support.

John, do you wanna comment? Sure, couple of comments as far as the variance for the setback in the rear, I'm in agreement on that with all the work that is going on here to rehabilitate and restore and keep as much as there is gonna be kept of the front building. I'm okay with with the two feet in the back since the city is taking that. There's been numerous other situations where that allowance has been given so I'm okay with this. I've got a little problem with the standing seam roof but it's not a end all be all for me.

It would be nice if there's a dimensional metal tile or something like that that could be used here, but, you know, I'm not gonna hold up on that. See what else there is. As far as the the comment on the drive or the driveway and the traffic there, that's just the way Delray is now. So I don't think anybody's gonna get away from traffic on Swinton anytime soon. And as long as there's not four cars parked up there all the time where you can't do a k turn and get out, I think it's gonna work as well as it does now.

But over all, it's not going up really high in the back. You're never gonna see it from the street for the most part and it is a very small lot. There's only so

much you can do so

I'm in favor of it.

Okay. So some of the questions I have to just about the roof, a little bit. It's a little odd that cricket shape. I mean, it's not very traditional or nothing like is this the the best way you can do it? I mean, can you do a a region in the middle and change a little? That's just a question I have to the architect actually. Is it there's a reason for that asymmetrical shape of the of the call it cricket, the middle roof there, connect

The middle section between the two ridges?

The reason common to see

that. I'm sorry?

It's not a very traditional shape.

One of the reasons is that the current house has the ridge line going from top and bottom of the page. And then in the new addition, the living room loggia, all of that has beams as well that create cathedral ceiling inside. So that ridge line goes from top to bottom a page. The middle is the section to be able to run off the water away from the building. We could look at it to try to make it smaller, but it does sit in between the two ridge lines, so you don't see it from any of the front or rear section.

But it is mostly to to have the two ridge ridgelines and where the valley comes in to be able to move all that water. Continuous. And

you're okay with the slope? I mean, it sounds a little low. That longer piece is just

For the material, we need to have a minimum slope, so that's one of the reasons why it's much wider because the material needs a minimum slope.

I understand. Alright. Well, looks a little unusual, so so I was thinking that. And since you're here, in terms of the windows and the the new windows Mhmm. Is the existing window, the one with the bigger bigger span with more openings and all that, the corner window, is that steel steel or aluminum today?

The type of windows? I didn't hear you. The material

that that is in the the larger windows that have a lot of panes, glass panes and thin mullions or this are they aluminum or or steel?

They're aluminum windows. Really? They're white aluminum.

Right.

And most of the as you see the front windows there, they're pretty large size windows. And they're the type of windows that it is did not allow for the proper egress according to code today. Didn't allow for that so we had to provide either single hung, which is not at all what the style here is, or the case ment style. We went with the casement style to allow for the egress along the side as well on the north side that we saw to allow for the egress and maintain the same proportion as the windows that are there now.

Okay. So yeah. Because they're very

They don't have divided molyas, but, yeah, they're they're the same proportion.

Been applied? You apply the molyas? Like The The the the mountains, so call it. They're gonna be applied. Right? I mean

They could be applied. They could be applied.

And they will be impact windows.

Correct? They they're impact windows. They're casement windows, so they're they're a single panel. The mountains could be applied on there.

Alright. It's I'm just concerned because they look more delicate than traditional new

One of the one of the reasons was to distinguish between what is original and what is new. If we made it all exactly the same, it starts looking too much similar.

I am well, as an architect, I always like the steel windows, but nobody, you know, can afford them. So that's that's another problem. But they I thought maybe there's an exception. This one has an existing corner window of

Yeah. The corner window is still important. Profiles,

but, you know, that's not very common. Okay. No. Actually, I support I I have to say that the owner is very courageous to to do this. You know? And it's a lot of a lot of work. Very interesting to see how it progresses.

Thank you. Thank you.

Carol. Yeah,

given the alley dedication and how many homes are on that alley with setbacks that are from zero to five feet. I did drive that alley this afternoon, and I did take a look to see, you know, the situation. So I I I feel like I can I can support that that variance? The only thing that really bothers me is the east elevation. I feel like and that's elevation along the alley. I feel like it was forgotten. There's one small little window. There's a big, huge blank wall. And I was wondering if you could do anything. This is a question for the architect.

If you can do anything or if you came prepared with any options for that side. Got any options?

Part of the part of the reasoning is that because of the narrow width of the property, to be able to fit decent sized master bedroom, we were squeezed in and the pool is next to the master. So the pool is between the main house, the existing house, and then the back kinda protects the pool from the alleyway. So it's really more to to contain that. It is a cabana in the back there, and the and the bathroom from the master is in the back. But it was more intentionally to create, like, an internal space for the pool.

Well, as if in in that case, though, this is an alley. So people are gonna be traveling along the alley. So really giving back something to the public, you know, alley space is what I would be more concerned with, especially since you're asking for a variance

I understand.

In that area. So is there any way you can articulate that that elevation a little more to give something back?

Well, keep in mind that the backyard that we have has a fence, an aluminum fence that is eight feet tall. So visually, you're not seeing anything from the alley in. We could create some more fenestrations in that elevation, but the the fence is eight foot tall already.

Can you go back to the

And it's more to keep that back backyard private.

I I don't think this is what you're saying, but I just wanna make it clear for the record that it's not like if you get the variance, the public gets this. You're more saying just like to give a view to the public when they're driving through the alley.

Right? Yeah. I am saying that. Yes. I'm saying that it would be nice to give something back to the public realm as you're, you know, in it. Okay. Same as as if you're along Swinton. You wanna give something back, you know, to Swinton or or whatever street and public space there is.

To give a a view to the public of since it's facing that I

mean, the existing elevation back there is very heavily articulated. I also saw that. Right. So when you see the existing elevation, the the rear elevation, and then

you come up with a

a very simple elevation on that other side. You know, I'm just I think it was I think it's a little off.

Well, the the comments you're making are supported by standards, visual compatibility standards and analysis in the code about the blank wall. So you know it's less about giving to the public and I understand that concern, right? But it is a visual compatibility standard that's in the staff report addressed as a concern with the expanse of the blank wall.

Yeah so that's why I was going back to you to say is there anything you can say you're saying that it's an eight foot fence in the back now. And so how high is the top of that window?

The window From the

finished like, from finished grade. How

At eight feet from the floor. Mhmm.

I mean

Because so what we could do is I could work with staff to create some additional fenestrations back there and instead of the little window, we could have a much bigger window there as well.

Yeah, I think it might help

out a little

bit. Mean,

I I would appreciate that.

Sure. Sure. I can work with staff to look

at that.

Eight foot. I wasn't thinking of the eight foot fence either when I was when I was, you know, looking at that. So Okay. I can see where no one's gonna see much of anything from you'll probably have a hedge in front of that.

There's a hedge there as well.

You to have probably have a two foot setback on that fence and then a hedge

in okay. Thank you.

Sure. I I I support the project. I have the similar concerns about the windows, but I think they've been addressed. Think it's fine.

Okay. Couple thoughts. The I I I share most of what was said tonight, certainly about the nearly blank wall even though it is facing an alley. Alleys are important to our city. So I I certainly appreciate Carol bringing that up. I also have some concern about the roof metal scene. That seems to be kind of a trend, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what the other homes on Swinton in that area are. I think a lot of them are shingle roofs. Shingle roofs. Mhmm.

They're the same. So I agree with John on on a concern there. I did want to ask, this is a mixed use district, but is the intent to keep it as a residential home once Yes.

It is. Yes. It is.

Okay. And in terms of amount of permeable surface, particularly with adding a swimming pool, are, and I guess this is to staff, are we within the requirements of the percent of the property that needs to be permeable?

Yes. The minimum requirement is 25% and they are meeting the 25% open space requirement.

But permeable and open space are not interchangeable values. Values.

Right.

So there is a 25% minimum open space as Michelle noted for all green area. But the drainage calcs are really what are going to dictate the amount permeable versus impermeable, categorizing what kind of drainage they're using, trench, swale and so on. There's maximum building coverage and the proposal meets those requirements.

The swimming pool does not count as Pyramidville. Right? No. Let's look at okay. I think that's all I had. If we're ready to make a motion Vlad, do you wanna make a motion?

If if not? I can't hear you.

I

can't I can't hear the thing.

I'm glad

you have you definitely have to speak up.

I can't

hear you.

I'm just getting the the But if writing on the wall here. Yes. Hold on one second.

Really, anyone can make the motion. Yeah.

I I make the motion.

Is there there Carol because you were talking about the window and we gotta be careful about designing from the dais here but is there any conditions that anybody wants to put on this in terms of that? I personally don't have any but.

Fine. No. So are we I just have a question about the variance. The variance is included in the We don't have to vote specific for 48 and Right. Seven things is all included.

It's included in the motion. It's not like it is on board of adjustment where you have to go through each finding. Long as you guys considered it while you were reviewing the

So are you adding something about the blank wall? Okay. No.

I guess not. Should I? No. I promise. So I propose to approve the certificate of appropriateness for 02/2002 demolition and variance request for the property located at 333 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square this historic district by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria criteria set forth in the

LDRs. Second. Just

a little bit of discussion. I I I'm not sure if if I would have proposed the condition in there, but I did hear the applicant say that they would come back and talk about fenestration with staff. Is that correct?

Was the request, yes.

I can include it.

If they choose to do so.

If the motion maker chooses to do that and the seconder agrees, then yes.

Yeah. I think it has to be included within your motion if you want that to happen. If if I mean, you guys had all indicated when they asked about when John asked about a condition that you didn't want one, so I think that's what Vlad was doing. But if you guys do want a condition, you know, obviously, you can make the amendment.

Do I amend it? Yes.

No. It's up to

Yeah.

I mean, whoever wants to amend it amend it can can propose the amend amendment.

Do you amend it by just adding on to it or you it all over again and amend it?

You can just say whatever the amendment you want to make is.

And if you could use your mic.

I would like to amend the action to add that the applicant come back and speak

to

staff about the fenestration or the articulation of the east elevation of the building.

Of the rear elevation?

Yes, yes.

And work with staff Yes,

and work with staff.

Okay. And the second has to agree with it? I'll second it. K. Call the roll.

Ezra Craig?

Yes.

John Miller? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Chris Kopezes? Yes. Plaidya Matrescu? Yes. Colonel Perez? Yes. Jim Chart?

Yes.

Okay. So I would like to enter file 2024Dash133 into the record. This is for 46 Marine Way. It's a certificate of appropriateness, variances, waivers, relocation involved with this request. Can

we take the conversation outside please?

If we could just if we if everyone could move outside and then carry the conversations out there. Thank you.

So applicant and their agent are here and will make a presentation. I just would like to note that there is complexity to this request and I know that we are fifteen minutes each for our presentations. Our presentation is fairly in-depth. Some some sure the applicants will be as well. So just take that into consideration. Kind of asking ahead of time.

Ex parte.

Okay.

Toured the property with a representative of the applicant and got a chance to to go all around the property. Okay.

And received a couple of emails.

Yes. One email.

Okay. I got an email from Claudia Willis, and I heard from Kristen Finn, but I did not have a conversation with her any further than just noting that it was on the agenda. And I just received this other sheet here today, but I did not see that in my emails. Was that emailed to us? From Bruce Lee? Carol would

I think so.

I did okay. Sorry.

I didn't see that.

It was emailed to you today by staff.

I did not see that email, but I I see that it was printed out and that was before me and I did read that. Okay.

Blad? Well, I hate to read. Okay. Okay. I read it to you.

Did you go to the site at all? Okay.

Actually, I tried. I couldn't get the text.

Yeah. I got the email from Claudia, the email from Bruce. I did speak to Kristen Finn about this, and I did tour the site.

Same. I got both emails and toured the site. I

also got the two emails and had a call with Kristen

received the emails, same that the staff received. So met with Kristen on-site and took a tour of the project.

Alright. Proceed.

Excellent. Alright. Good evening, everybody. I'm glad that my team and I are finally here. We're happy to be in front of you tonight presenting this property. My name is Catherine Craig. I live at 654 Lakewood Circle West here in Delray Beach, and and I will be the representing agent for this property. The subject property is located in the Marina Historic District. It was built in 1926, and it is considered to have a Mediterranean revival architectural style. In this slide, we can appreciate the neighboring homes to the south and north, and we can take a closer look at the location map.