Historic and Environmental Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. All opposed? Motion carries. So it is deferred until next month. Now we'll move into the new thing on the agenda, which is the resolutions or the consent agenda.

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

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

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

So is it the pleasure of the board to accept these as under the consent agenda? Do we need a motion for that? Does anyone object? No objection, okay. And you want to enter the staff report into the record?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Campbell, did you have additional questions?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So the ornate iron gate is not original? No.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Can you get a little closer to the microphone?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I see what you mean. Is there a way, though, that you could, instead of having individual windows, you could mention something about putting a double window in? I think that would be less confusing to the eye.

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

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

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

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

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

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

It would be a condition to explore. It would be a condition to explore the possibility. Like we were probably going to add a condition that the royal palms be moved at all possible?

Okay, that's what we're looking for. So are we ready for a motion? Anyone else have any other questions?

He was to explore changing, I believe it was the windows on the first story, turning those into double windows, is that right?

And so we're looking for a motion incorporating those conditions, right?

There was a condition about the tree relocation, the window, explore the window and the roof.

You mean seconded? Okay, there's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? We have the conditions reiterated for us, please.

Yes, sir to the tree Condition and that is you said into the easement and could we just say or other location in the surrounding area? Is that acceptable to them?

Any questions on that motion? Can we have a roll call, please?

He's the property owner. Okay, good. Thank you very much. Okay, we'll start with the staff report.

Thank you. Is there anything you would like to add to the staff report? Is there anything you would like to add to the staff report?

Okay, thank you. Is there anyone from... No trees. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Please come forward, give your name and address for the record.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public? Yes, sir.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? I'll ask again, just for clarification, is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'm going to close the public hearing and open up to the board for questions or comments, starting with Mr. Trachtenberg.

Whatever you want to do. Sir. Do not interrupt another board member.

It's elevated. Speak into the microphone.

I think you need to keep this as close to the original as possible.

Your turn. It's a lot of agenda left, so I will not belabor this with reflective comments. I agree with everything that's been said on this board. I'll be very, very brief here, but I think ultimately it's very important. Details matter profoundly in historic districts. That's what differentiates pastiche from authenticity. And I think what you're hearing here tonight is a very coherent collection of feedback that's helping you add to your neighborhood rather than detract from it. You made a point that these are some of the most expensive neighborhoods in Miami. And a big reason for that is be

Well, I will say I'm delighted that you guys didn't, and I'm glad you went through the process. And I realize it's painful, but it's appreciated. And I think don't take the vitriol in the wrong way. The goal here, I think, is for everybody to arrive at the same conclusion, which is for you to get the house you like, but also for it not to damage the historical fabric of your neighborhood.

Yeah, that's clear. No further comments. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. My comments kind of reflect those from the Buena Vista East Design Advisory Committee, particularly on the Second floor additions and the differentiation between the historic and the new addition that there should be some kind of distinction there. I echo my colleagues' comments on everything else, especially the unacceptability of gray tile. There should be some kind of terracotta family. Are there any other questions or comments for the application from the board member? Yes, Mr. Perez.

Any other questions? Are we ready for comments? Are we ready for a motion?

I can take a stab at emotion, but I would be profoundly grateful to my architecturally minded colleagues to capture some of the feedback that may not be captured in the 14 conditions written by staff should they deviate from what they're seeing. Gentlemen. No, no, I'm asking if you guys have further comments.

Oh, no, no, I haven't. And we'll correct you as you go along. There was a lot of feedback, and I would rather not try to distill your learned comments. Maybe you could start.

I would rather do it the other way around. I think it would be a little bit more coherent. Bob, what was important to you?

Okay, but that is what's already by staff. So that's already covered by staff, and you're comfortable for that to be approved at staff level?

No, no, that's good. This is helpful. Mr. Perez, Mr. Campbell, Condition 3 addresses the front entrance. Are you satisfied with the wording of Condition 3?

I believe the intent is to maintain the open porch.

Yes. So modifying then condition three to preserve the open porch format.

So then can we just add a new condition 14 that the applicant, in concert with staff, will add windows to that blank facade? Yes. Condition 15. Um, and there was a, there was a landscape before you move on from that. Sorry, go ahead.

So to be approved by staff, but in keeping with the current historic context of the house.

Bob, you had comments on colors. I don't think there's any condition addressing colors or tile.

I think white makes it go all the way of a little bit too blacked out. To be approved by staff. Terracotta. Colors.

Okay. So we'll add that as a condition. 16 on the color. 17. Well, they can't be double. They have to be single hung.

I think we can add a comment to study that in concert with staff. So I'll add condition 17, staff to study the differentiation of the second floor addition with the applicant and find something suitable for the Secretary of Interior standards. Mr. Comis, are you confident in the added conditions? So modifying 13, sorry, modifying condition three to removing the enclosure of the porch, so preserving the open porch format?

Right. So then no condition for or does that is that obvious by a change in condition three I'm going to leave it as the punched opening shall be retained.

All right. Well, if it's open, it's very good. So then there's a new condition 15 addressing the addition of windows along the blank facade to be approved by staff in a historically appropriate context. Condition 16 addressing the preference for terracotta tiles. And the new condition 17 that we just added related to the differentiation of the modern second story addition and conforming to Secretary of Interior standards in terms of differentiation to be studied and approved, or to be studied by the applicant and approved by staff. Luis, I have a question.

fence by the pool condition six um by staff will um mitigate that glass wall to something more historic that is a it's a great question um i i was meant to ask it and i lost track of it so condition six has written does that address the handrail the glass handrail shown currently is inclusive it addresses the uh what we what we think would be better suited for the uh instead of a raised parapet No, no. Condition six. All fencing shall conform to the historic design guidelines.

So then we'll add a new condition 18 to have an alternative to the glass for the area surrounding the pool. Something more historically appropriate. Yes.

I think that was... That's already done. That's already... I think as it currently stands, it already covers that. So no glass? Yeah, Mr. Colmus, our preference is no glass. To be approved by staff, not glass.

Yeah, so amending 11, no glass. And then adding the new condition, 18, no glass around the pool. with the alternate to be approved by staff.

Actually, let's pin that for just one second. Let me make sure we've got... It was a window question. Yeah, we'll come back to that. Let me just make sure that staff has got all this feedback before we click reset and lose all of this and... That's what I'm...

I had the same problem. Your question, sir.

Najeeb, which elevation were you concerned with?

Is that captured in existing conditions or you need to add it?

I mean, it's not captured presently beyond the fact that staff has, per the conditions, ceded that decision to staff in concert with them. So, Jordan, unless you want to make that a specific condition, if you're happy for that to be something that Ken can work on with the applicant separately to be approved.

So setting the western second story wall back slightly and continuing the parapet elevation with the terracotta detailing around to the western side.

Okay. So I'll modify the one that I read into the record as condition 15 to include that detail. Ken, is that clear enough? Okay. Then on that basis, I make the motion to approve with the 14 conditions provided by staff, amending condition three to include a, to require the maintenance of an open porch, and then the additional four conditions that were read in over the course of this discussion.

Najeeb Tug. Okay. Let's speak of you, Jordan. Second.

Are there in there's a motion in the second discussion on the motion. We have a roll call please.

Thank you for that. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Here's your chance. Nope. Okay, we'll close the public hearing and open it to the board for questions or comments. Note for the record that we have received a handout of letters of support in Spring Garden for the project. Mr. Trachtenberg, you want to? Yep.

I have no further comments echoing the sentiment of the board. Well done. Nice project.

Me too, except I would cast my vote also for metal treatment of the roof.

Are we saying that we want to keep the ghost wall or we want to not keep the ghost wall?

Thank you. And before we recognize the applicant, I would just remind the board that we have an hour and a half until we have to conclude our discussions. Is the applicant present? Please give your name and address for the record.

Is there anything you would like to add to the staff report?

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? No one from the public to speak on this item? Then I will close the public hearing and open up to the board for questions or comments. Starting with Mr. Prieto-Iminos.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't have very many questions, and I'll try to keep it brief in the interest of time. Coming back to your original preambles following the city's presentation, did you object to any of the seven conditions presented by staff? Could you come back to that?

But that is the only condition to which you're objecting? Mr. Combs, can you articulate your thought process behind the condition? Or Adrian, I'm assuming one of you two came up with that.

Thank you, Adrian. That's clear. And I think from my perspective, I would defer to the more aesthetically and architecturally minded members of the board. So I have no further questions at this time. Actually, I did have one question. I take that back. You say the square footage shrunk from its original design. I was curious where the shrinkage came from.

So it's footprint of the interior, it's actual square footage of the interior, not the building envelope itself.

Thank you so much. I have no further questions.

Let's come back to that at the end. Come back to it? Yeah. Ms. O'Dell?

Point taken, Mr. Bowers. We need to move on. Mr. Colley, please.

Thank you. And my only comments are to echo my colleagues concerns about parking and noise from the from the roof structure. And Mr. Schuman, I believe you wanted to speak on something else in rebuttal. You still Did you want to speak again?

Right. That was good. If not, are you ready for a motion?

So the motion in the second, any discussion on the motion? If not, let's have a roll call, please.

Thank you. Is the appellant present? Is the appellant present? Please come and give your name and address for the record. Is the appellant present?

I think we'll start with the staff report.

You mean the Royal Poinciana, is that correct?

I thought we were finished. It's coming.

Thank you very much. Is the applicant present? Yes, please come give your name and address for the record.

Thank you, sir. Are there members from the public who wish to speak on this item? Please come forward at this time. Give your name and address for the record and limit your comments to two minutes or less.

I don't know where you... We need to move on.

Thank you. Before you leave, would you give us your address, please, for the record?

Thank you. Anybody else? I'll be brief, Chair.

I think the arguments made have been very compelling, and I'm not convinced that Chapter 17 standards for the removal of the two large trees are justified, so I would be inclined to grant the appeal in part and to deny it in part in regard to the remaining trees. So I try to keep that brief. I don't know where everybody else lands, but I am validly convinced that those two trees do not need to be removed to satisfy the conditions of the code.

Mr. Powers, do you want to add anything?

Yes, sir. And I think just really briefly to John, on the arborist report thing, and I don't mean to impugn anybody's professionalism here, but I mean, I've sat on this board long enough to know that every tree that comes up before it will have two competing arborist reports. I'm very much of the opinion that for the most part, through the prism of Chapter 17, I'd prefer to err on the side of mature canopy than on the side of, you know, it's remarkable how every tree in a footprint is always diseased and problematic. So with that in mind, I wish to make a motion to grant the appeal with regard

Oh, that was quick. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Can we have a roll call, please?

One moment, please. One moment, please. In order to go beyond nine o'clock, I believe we need to have a motion.

There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? I believe that there's a limit to one hour. Is that correct?

We're waiting for a clarification on the restrictions.

We're trying to stay. We're just figuring out how long.

And Mr. Kalmas, I have a disclosure prior to the item being read into the record, if this would be appropriate. I received a call today from somebody known to me, specifically referred to this project, it was not about the merits of it, but it was about an email received by the appellant regarding a potential phishing element in terms of a, it was effectively an email that detailed the need for the appellant to pay an additional fee, and I was called and I was asked about this item, so that's my disclosure.

You were aware of that? Okay. Well, then I will end my disclosure there.

Okay, so the appellant is present, the appellant's attorney. Please come give your name and address for the record.

Thank you, and we'll start with the staff report.

Thank you. Mr. Appellant, it's your turn.

Thank you. Before we go into hearing comments from the general public, we have to take a short break to allow the people upstairs to change the DVD because it's getting full, and we have to record the entire meeting. So we're going to take a short break, and we'll ask them to indicate to me when it's time, when we're able to start back up.

Ladies and gentlemen, let's take a seat, please, and line up. We are back on the record. I would ask members of the public to have a seat or line up to provide comments. And the board members to return to the dais. Or else we'll have to stop.

Okay, we have a quorum. Are there members of the public who wish to speak on this item? Please come to the microphone and speak.

Yeah, you can just lean them up against the window.

How do you know we don't have that passion? How do you know that we do not have that same passion for trees?

Thank you. Yes, sir. Go ahead, sir. Sir, go ahead.

Please give us your name and address first.

We'll get we'll get we'll get to it. Okay. Your comments on this one first.

Any other comments from the public on this item? Council, you have a chance for rebuttal.

I'll now close the public hearing, having given opportunity for everyone to speak. I went up to the board for questions and comments. Starting, who wants to start this time?

I'll take a stab. Okay, go ahead. I think it's remarkable that so many of you did stay this late to hear this item. And I do think it's important from a Coconut Grove facing standpoint. I also live in Coconut Grove. I live two blocks from this house. And I walk my dog in front of this parcel every day. And I think it is incumbent on us, the residents, also to take steps in a different direction. I won't belabor this hearing with that, but I do think that it's important that we recognize that an appeal is a bit of a blunt instrument for the purposes that we're intending. And there are a lot of

If we could start with the avocado tree, tree number 34 slated for removal. Let me throw a preamble into this before we go into the back and forth. I'm looking at the list of trees to be removed. The majority of these, mercifully, are relatively small trees. So my main focus is going to the larger ones. And this avocado, I believe, is the largest of all with a 28-inch DBH.

That's fair. Let's go to the sapodilla, number 17.

Sorry, would you mind talking a little closer? Sure.

Thank you, Carlos. That clarifies why. That was one of my curiosities. It's on the perimeter of the property. Why would you have to remove it? Coming to the royal palm, tree number 14, why was that not a candidate for relocation?

I mean, this is relevant, Carlos, because I think we dealt with this maybe a month or two ago on Leafy Way. There was a number of royal palms which were, everybody agreed to move them. So why can't we move this one?

critical root zone there's just no space to move it with it so even if we wanted to relocate it i don't think there's a spot within the property where you could potentially relocate that i think that's a good segue here carlos um so in mr winkler's um opening remarks he made a comment and actually mr mcalilly made the same comment which was that there was a back and forth recently and that it was in communicated to them that if you had your druthers if you had the ability to choose there are certain trees that would not be removed but you were being mandated to remove these by the city Could y

So I'm going to take a very candid... tack here. I think at the end of the day, ultimately, you have a fairly large building footprint. I think you've brought in a good team of professionals to get you where your client needs to go. But I think that there's certain elements here that are problematic for me. And I don't think I can get over them without some adjustments. So I'll just be very frank. I'm not going to abuse the bully pulpit more than I have to. But What I'm seeing is there is a significant element of the mature canopy that's being removed. I'm taking your word on the avocado tree,

Okay, so just for those who were concerned about the potential survivability of the gumbo-limbos that are being relocated, the developer is posting a replacement bond for those trees. So there is some mechanism to safeguard that. So I don't know if that was clear to those of you who were. 16,000 each. So, yeah, so I mean, that's where my concerns are. I mean, I don't know where you guys can, I don't know if it's something you have thought about. I don't know if those are concerns that the team has arrived at independently and if there are some areas of mitigation, but in the current state, I w Okay, so I'll pause there if my colleagues have additional comments.

Okay. But that is not within this application?

I'm not happy about that one bit. I'm not happy about that removal.

I think if there is some mechanism for you and your client to do... Thank you. to take steps to mitigate or to preserve that oak tree and ensure that it has the potential ability to survive and not be cut down by the city, I think that would certainly go some way.

Carlos, would there be an appetite to plant a specimen mahogany in lieu, knowing that this tree is going to be torn down or cut down almost inevitably? Oh, sorry, I've monopolized it.

So I understand that because it's the city that might be removing it, you can't control the timing of the replanting, but I think we could certainly condition, could we not?

I mean, I think just adding, while they deliberate, I think, so if I'm not mistaken, then this, what's the DBH of this tree?

In total, right? If you look at this whole picture, the net impact is an enormous canopy loss. It's unmitigated. It's fully unmitigated. So I appreciate this is not your client's responsibility in as much as this is the city mandating it.

We're still dealing with a huge canopy loss that's fully unmitigated. I mean, it's unconscionable.

I completely understand, but I'm... Do you want me to say something? If you'd like to, sure.

No, I get that. I know Public Works has very little esteem for trees. They cut them down wherever they can.

I understand, but if it was anybody but the city, they'd have an enormous mitigation they'd have to do. It's obscene that the city doesn't have to mitigate this.

The Tree Trust Fund is nonsense. I mean, at the end of the day, it's... Local canopy matters so much more than this.

But at the end of the day, if we're looking at the local, if this was three feet over, he would have to mitigate 41 inches of DBH. And because the logic of the code is that 41 inches of tree diameter have been removed from the canopy, and therefore they need to be mitigated. So I think it's one of those things that by happenstance of right of ways, there is a substantial net ecological impact that's not being mitigated. And that's just a simple fact. Please. Hi.

That's a super clarification, Sean. Thank you for that. I think it's good to know that. So this will be posted locally at the relevant site. okay good so for all of those listening yeah that's why that's why it's reflected as a to remain that clarifies that thank you it was unclear if that would be going through so to those of you listening if you feel like this tree should be anything should be considered it's to you for it's for up to you to appeal it so sorry go on john i'll be quiet for a bit no no to that point uh somebody mentioned that for five years it's been mentioned that it was goin

That's not even on this intended decision.

I have a question coming back to some of the trees along the northern side of the property that are just considered to remain due to the septic tank's drain field. Out of curiosity, did you consider alternate septic systems with smaller drain fields?

I appreciate that from the arborist standpoint, but from the systems development. So there are a variety of different septic systems. Some are conventional. Some use aerobic digesters. Some use a dispersion of various drip systems. I'm curious if any of those alternate systems, i.e. systems that use much smaller drain fields, were considered. Because this is quite a large drain field. I mean, this looks like a conventional drain field.

I think the concern here comes precisely from the fact that we're looking at this through the prism of chapter 17 of the code, which of course focuses on the city's ecology and the ecological value afforded by these trees. The privacy is immaterial in that computation. And it's problematic if those trees are small. I mean, if those are destined to be smaller trees, we're removing some really large ones. I mean, this sapodilla is 45 feet tall from, or has a 45 foot canopy from what I'm seeing. And likewise, this avocado, which I appreciate the testimony earlier that it's in poor condition and i

Any final thoughts? Yeah, I mean, that's where I'm landing. I'm looking at this, and I'm taking a practical view on this and finding something that is, I think, workable for the neighborhood and preserves as much of this as possible, but at the same time, you know, appreciates the effort that has gone into the other layers of preservation. And in maintaining the lychee tree, which you're quite right in saying that was the lightning rod for the last go-around, and I recall... that that last applicant got exactly what he deserved. But I think the point is, I mean, I'm looking at this list of rem

Understood, but within that framework, I mean, everything that we've discussed now, I'm not validly convinced that the mitigations offered are a one-to-one mitigation, and that is what's required by Chapter 17. And we're removing large bits of canopy. Admittedly, you're preserving an enormous amount of specimen trees. And I'll stop congratulating you guys on that part of it, because it's a late part of the meeting. But ultimately, my point is simply, from a Chapter 17 standpoint, I think we can do better. It doesn't have to be an environmental preservation district to require a one-for-one mit

Well, I think it's about time for a motion to approve or to deny the appeal with or without conditions.

How does my rant sound to you, Carlos? Where do you land with that? Again.

So where is there a natural area around there?

I think what makes the grove really interesting is the disparity. I think the remnants, coming to the historical standpoint, Coconut Grove was a commercial fruit grove into the early part of the teens. And some of these are remnants of what those old commercial fruit groves were. In fact, the vast majority of the early development was done by the Sunshine Fruit Corporation, which was a fruit grove manager. So this is integral to the fabric of coconut grove from a historical standpoint. So I appreciate where you're coming from, but frankly, to a certain extent, it's becoming awfully boring to l

That's no on a sapodilla is what you're saying.

i mean i i disagree i think that there are a variety of technologies available to reduce the size of drain fields and to reroute them i would say um i i appreciate that i can't tell you with certainty what that is given the particulars of your project so i wouldn't require you i mean i i don't know let me let me marinate on that well my other colleague you guys have nothing else to say i guess i have a question the

I'm not picking one. I'm looking at a list of 15 trees. I'll kill the palms. No palms, except for the royal palm. So we're looking at nine trees. I'm saying, or 10 hardwoods. Take eight of them. Sorry, take nine of them. I'm just saying that this sapodilla, it's just, I can't, I'm not going to, this is a clear-cut lot. It's not even anywhere close to the building footprint. I don't think that's reasonable, Carlos. I think that's one that you guys can figure out how to work around. You've got an amazing team standing behind you. I'm confident that you guys can figure out a way to make that tree

I have a question. What specifically is the appeal? If we grant the appeal, what are we granting? No trees will be removed?

No, we can grant and deny in part, like with the last motion.

They're putting bonds on the gumbo-limbos.

What are you trying to make your motion do? We're going to go with the grant the appeal. There's no numbers. It's just that.

Grant the appeal. The motion is to grant the appeal. Is there a second? Is there a second to the motion to grant the appeal?

Thank you. Any discussion on the motion to grant the appeal? Roll call, please.

Yep. Pick it up with the city commission.

I don't know whether or not I just don't like it.

No, sir. Can you give your name and address for the record?

To counsel, would you mind terribly reading into the record the qualifications for standing on this matter?

So an appellant would have to live within the 500 feet that would get the notification from the city about the intended decision?

How do we determine if there's, do we need a finding from the board to determine whether there's standing or not?

Is it the basis of your opinion, and that's the end of it? Or is it based on your opinion, the board has to make a finding that the applicant of the appellant has no standing?

No, we have to answer the standing question first. So are there questions or comments about whether or not the appellant has standing or not based on the city attorney's opinion?

So just for the... For the sake of discussion, from a standing standpoint, the issue isn't whether you are aggrieved or not. The issue is whether you have standing. So the grievance is secondary to the standing. So if you're not in a position to bring legal action forward on this matter, any deliberation here is instantly appealable, and all the effort and all of the attention that goes to that likely won't go anywhere else. It will just be an enormous tax on the resources of the system because it's binary. If you don't have standing, this matter is moot. So I think that's the, it's unfortunat

That's an interesting question. Out of curiosity, because she filed an appeal, would there not have been, had someone else filed an appeal, it would have been two appeals of the same decision, or would that one have been obviated?

Understood. I mean, I think that's an interesting point, and so for the purposes of those who are interested enough in this issue to have stayed through the enormous deliberations that have led to this point. There may be other people who didn't appeal because they knew that the current potential appellant did do the appeal. And so there is a scenario where that situation was precipitated by what the appellant is asserting as improper notice. So out of curiosity, on an issue of improper notice, what is the recourse that somebody would have under normal procedures?

So procedurally, would it go to a circuit court directly or would it first go to the commission?

That's a separate issue. We're looking only at standing first. So I need a motion whether the appellant has standing or not based on the advice of our city attorney.

For the sake of consistency with this body and ensuring that we're seen through the prism of acting within our lane, I would firstly say that I think you the approach you took was was was compelling i mean i think ultimately this is an item that should have been heard i think that at the same time you may have other legal options open to you and i think you should explore those but i think for the purposes of this hearing and i think given the advice that we received from our city attorney that I think I am validly convinced that you don't have standing and therefore that we can't hear this ma

The gentleman behind you, I think, would be a great person to talk to. So I would encourage you to take that route. I think that's the best one for what you have in front of you.

I would like to go through some discussion items.

We'd better not. Well, I just have a question about that. Mr. Cummins, did you think about my question about the June meeting?

Is there a move to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second?