Historic and Environmental Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you.

Preservation Board, I ask everyone to stand, please, for the Pledge of Allegiance. Please remain standing to be sworn in by...

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

Thank you. And I'd like to ask our city attorney to give us a note on lobbying.

Good evening. Any person who is a lobbyist pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 6 of the City Code must register with the city clerk. and comply with related city requirements for lobbyists before appearing before the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. A person may not lobby a city official, board member, or staff member until registering. Copy of the code section about lobbyists is available at the city clerk's office or online at www.municode.com.

Thank you. Can we have a roll call, please?

Calling Chair William Hopper.

Here.

Thank you. Calling Member Luis Prieto E. Munoz. Here. Vice Chair. Calling Member Najeeb Campbell. Calling Member Christopher Cauley.

Here.

Calling Member Elvis Fuentes. Calling Member Julie O'Dell. Calling Member John S. Perez.

Here.

Calling Member Bob Powers.

Here.

Calling Member Hugh Ryan.

Here.

And calling member Jordan Trachtenberg.

Here.

Thank you. I do have a request from Julie O'Dell for absence waiver.

Before we get to the absence waivers, I think we have a request from the reservation officer.

So there's been a request for a board member to attend the meeting virtually. That needs to be approved by the board. So at this time, if the board, it has to be an extreme circumstance. And so the board needs to take a vote on whether they will approve Mr. Power's request and his extreme circumstance to be able to participate remotely. So moved.

Is there a second? I'll second. Is there any discussion on the motion?

Only discussion is to say a blob. I hope you behave yourself today.

We can always mute him. Yes, Mr. Ryan. You have a mute button, right? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Welcome, Mr. Powers. Thank you. Now we have a request for absence waivers.

I move to approve Ms. O'Dell's absence waiver.

Is there only one? I'll second. Motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries.

Excuse me, for clarity of record, who seconded the motion? Thank you so much.

Everyone has a chance to read the minutes from November and December.

Yes, Chair. I move to approve both sets of minutes.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Aye. Motion carries. I think we're ready for the discussion items.

So just a quick monthly updates. The first is I want to let the board know that Ms. Chung has left the city of Miami, so that seat is being vacated, and we're starting the process that we will need to take to restaff as necessary. And I do want to mention that the application for the grants program close date has been extended to January 23rd, so we've given applicants a bit more time. We have had a good showing of applications at this point. So those are my two updates at the moment.

And sorry, just for the record, what's the website that you had mentioned last time? It's HP Grants. I have to double check. Thanks.

You can just go to miami.gov, and it's on the historic preservation. Okay, great.

So there's a link on the miami.gov?

Yeah, from miami.gov. Thank you.

I think we'll move into the public hearing portion of the agenda. Starting, I guess, we'll wait to discuss what will happen with the individual items, but we'll start with the resolution for the annual report. Has everyone had a chance to read it? And are there any additions or corrections to it?

Yes, Mr. Chair, I would move to approve as submitted.

Second? Second. Any discussion on that motion?

Beautifully written. Great. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. And now... Item number two is regarding the election of a chairman or chairperson for this calendar year. Are there any nominations?

I nominate Dr. William Hopper.

I second it.

Are there any other nominations? Is there a motion to elect by acclamation?

I make a motion to elect by acclamation. Second? Second. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time hearing who we elect for a vice chair.

We haven't got there yet.

Okay, I'm sorry.

We're just about to do that now. So we're now opening nominations for the election of a vice chair for this coming year.

I'd like to nominate the current sitting vice chair.

Is there a second? Second.

Second.

Are there any other nominations? Now we'll close the nominations. And all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

The motion carries.

Congratulations. And now we'll move to the individual hearing items. We will start by announcing the item by staff. We'll pass it down to you. Sorry. So we'll announce the item individually. The applicant or appellant will come forward, give your name and address for the record, and we'll follow immediately with a staff report. After the staff report, the applicant or appellant will have the opportunity to respond. making their presentation in 10 minutes or less, hopefully. After that, members of the public may address the board with questions or 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 limit discussion to the board and the applicant and staff and to whomever the board decides to ask questions to. Then we'll have a motion and after which the item will either be approved or denied. We'll move on to the next one. So we're up for item number four.

Calling help item number four, file ID 18146, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2, subsection B4 of the City Code of Ordinances, approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit the demolition of a non-contributing structure located approximately at 959 Southwest 4th Street, Miami, Florida, 33130. Within the Riverview Historic District, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Is the applicant present? Are the applicant's attorney present?

Yes, I am.

Please give your name and address for the record.

Yes, my name is Alfredo Gonzalez. I'm an attorney with Gunster with offices at 901 Parsley on 10th floor.

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

Just before we do that, I have a substitution memo I want to bring up. Read it out, or? Yeah, just one. Okay, great. You've all seen it, then just I'd like to put this into the record. Approved. So we have an updated staff analysis.

That book has a copy? Does the applicant's attorney have a copy?

Do you have a copy?

Yes, I have a copy. Okay, thanks.

Okay, great. So the updated conditions.

Excuse me.

So we believe the application has demonstrated partial compliance with Chapter 23. entitled Historic Preservation of the City Code of Ordinances and the Secretary of Interior Standards. Staff finds the request that all applicable criteria have been met and that the request for a special certificate of appropriateness to permit demolition with a new development will not adversely affect the historic, architectural, and aesthetic character of the district. We recommend an approval with conditions of the Special Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the structure. The new development should come before the HEP Ward for approval within 6 to 12 months once it has been reviewed and approved by other agencies slash departments as part of the building submittal process. Staff have provided recommendations for the design should the plans for the proposed building move forward after demolition of the existing apartment garage structure. The recommendations are that the applicant should submit within six to 12 months with a revised redevelopment plan that has been reviewed by all required agencies. The second recommendation, at time of permitting and or sub-permitting, manufacturers, brochures, or color photographs of proposed design elements and materials, including but not limited to windows, doors, railings, roofing, etc., shall be submitted for approval. Third recommendation, all glass to be clear and or low E. Tinted and opaque glass is not allowed. Number four, window design on the facade shall be further studied to include a more horizontal orientation to be reviewed and approved by staff. Within the building permit, five, vertical banding on the facade will be eliminated or significantly reduced. Six, the roof line will be restudied to potentially eliminate the shed parapet or create a tower-like appearance where the aluminum bars are located. Seven, the building number shall not be painted on the facade and will be installed in a manner which is complementary to surrounding contributing properties to the Riverview Historic District. Eight, the applicant will revisit the color of the proposed exterior paints to better reflect the tones of surrounding contributing properties. This will be reviewed at staff level. So the following are conditions of approval. The existing structure shall be demolished in accordance with the plan submitted as part of application PZ2418839. The resolution shall be included in the master permit set. Three, the applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Miami 21 code and chapter 17, chapter 23 of the City of Miami code of ordinances. And four, the applicant shall comply with the requirements of all department agencies as part of the City of Miami building permit submittal process.

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

Well, I'm here representing the applicant and the owner of the property, and we support the staff recommendation. We accept the conditions of staff recommendation. We want you to understand that we have a demolition order from the unsafe structures.

Not working?

Sorry, can you get a little closer to the microphone? Okay, sure.

Thank you. So we have a order from the unsafe structures board to demolish this property. We have a 60-day window to do that. We have an expert report that says this property is unsafe. We get calls all the time by the police that there are people loitering and in there. We have submitted plans. We will work with staff diligently. We said last time we were here, we said we would submit plans. We did it within two days after that hearing. So we would ask you to approve the demolition subject to the recommendation of staff.

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

Please come to the microphone. Excuse me, I'd like to announce the arrival of Member Najeeb Campbell.

Thank you.

I was looking, hi, my name is Raisa Fernandez, and I'm a resident of the roads in Little Havana. I've been here for 63 years. And I know that area because my parents, my mother and my two brothers lived there in 1962, which is 963. Yours is 959. So what are they trying to do? Knock it down?

That's correct.

Okay, because I was trying to see, which one is it? Is it the yellow tall building?

No, it's a one-story or two-story house set back.

It's a housing building? It's a housing?

Yeah, it's a house.

So what is wrong with it? Can it be, does it have to be demolished?

Yeah, the unsafe structure board found it to be unsafe and that we had to demolish it. Number two, we have an expert engineer that's looked at the property and said we have to demolish it. It's... It's not subject to repair, and we have submitted plans for its redevelopment, which we would have to work out with staff.

Yeah, because I know that area, that's a historical area, because there's a garage right there, and I know the owner of the garage on 4th and 10th Avenue. I know the owner. So they're going to redo that one.

Excuse me. This should be public comment regarding the issue, not questions to the applicant.

I think they shouldn't be demolished. I think it should be restored. And I think it could be restored anyways. Because I have homes of 100 years old and they're restored. So I don't know why it cannot be, instead of destroying it, rebuilding for people that need housing right now. And there's a need for it. So thank you anyways.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions, comments, or a motion.

Mr. Edge, I just have some questions for staff just before we kind of get into the meat of it, just out of curiosity. If I may? Yes. I think this is the first time, at least during my tenure, that I've seen a recommendation that draws reference to the resubmission, and it's unclear to me, are we approving exclusively the demolition, or are we approving the demolition plus the new building?

So we're recommending that the demolition is approved on the condition that Should this new design be something the board wants to see?

So you are specifically approving the demolition, right? They have a redevelopment plan that they have submitted for the board to look at, perhaps comment on if you wish to. Based on timing and concerns zoning has about this project, it may change to include access for parking and things like that. So we... we wanted the board to be able to move forward with the determination on the demolition, and then they can revisit what needs to be revisited and come back to the board.

Okay, so just for clarity, Mr. Coleman, this will, for the new construction, this will come back to the board for a full certificate of appropriation, special certificate of appropriation?

At such a time as they present new construction, yes.

Yes. Is a condition of the demolition that they submit such a proposal within six to 12 months? As recommended.

You can make it that they shall. Our recommendation is that they should.

I see your point. Okay, very good. That's it from me for now.

Can I chime in? I know we're doing the new order.

Yes. Can I jump in or do you want me to wait? You'll be third next.

No, no, no. Mr. Perez is next.

Are we to comment on the actual plan submitted?

For demolition.

Okay. I noticed, I mean, I agree that the new plan should be submitted, I mean, at its appropriate time so that we can evaluate it. I was looking at it, and based on the recommendations, I see that it doesn't necessarily conform to the styles of the neighborhood, and I would encourage any type of incorporating elements of some of the historical styles that are listed in the designation report.

Our client is committed to working with staff and we'll get you a plan that you find acceptable.

Excellent. Second, I was looking at the plan and I'm for the demolition based on its current condition, but I see that what's proposed to be demolished is only the structure. and the areas of concrete immediately adjacent to the structure. I don't see that the rest of the pavement of the concrete in the first two-thirds of the property are proposed to be demolished, which leads me to believe that the intention, and I could be incorrect, is to remove the building but keep the parking. I see a couple, if that's the case, I would see a couple of issues with that. That the intent would be to basically keep using it as parking. Any parking on the property, if I'm incorrect, would be incidental to an existing structure. Therefore, I don't know how that would be handled if concrete is kept in the first two-thirds, number one. Number two, I doubt that the existing asphalt It has drains or sloped in a way where the water that falls on the property is contained within the property the way it's required by code. Therefore, if this building were to be demolished, I would suggest to demolish the entire thing so the property can drain properly and then the property can be ready for a new building.

We have no objection to that. We're not parking anything there. People from the neighborhood come and park. It's hard to police that, but we would be okay with that.

Mr. Campbell? Thank you. The issue of demolitions has caused a few members of the public to be critical of the board. And I am looking at this particular project and some commentary has been, we should always do this or be consistent with that, so on and so forth. In my experience, I've seen some items, there's probably one on there later on today also, where unsafe structures gives an okay to demolish something. It doesn't come to us, and then we hear that the building was fine or almost fine or could be fine. Then I see a case like this where, as the gentleman pointed out, this could be a base for nefarious activity, accidents, so on and so forth. So the requirement, or it may be a requirement right now that a plan has to be submitted prior to demolition. If the structure is a problem to the area, but yet the person has not submitted a plan, should not having a plan supersede not demolishing a structure that is a danger to the area? Or should we stick with that rule? I think by a case-by-case basis is one of the best ways to go to analyze whether a structure should be demolished. And I'm wondering if before unsafe structures, okay is a demolition, if that should begin to start coming to us before giving a permission to demolish. But... In this case, I agree that this structure should be demolished, and I look forward to seeing the new plans.

Mr. Ryan?

Oh, okay. I was just, first of all, let me ask you, you said that these plans were submitted in two days. This is almost like a cut and paste of something that would be on Miami Beach. If you remember from last time, I have a building on the corner of 4th and 10th. And last time, last meeting, we had somebody plans to redo the gas station. I've owned the thing for 16 years. Just to answer what the public has to say, the questions, this structure was a garage apartment that never had a house. And it's in horrible, horrible shape right now. And You know, I know the neighborhood today very, very well. It's a complete derelict piece of junk that's not worth being saved. So it should go. But what goes in place of it, first of all, If you're going to take notes for what to actually really submit when you come back, parking. Parking is the number one, hold on, number one problem is crackheads, number two problem is hookers, number three problem is parking. And chickens are in there too. But the parking is, and everyone laughs, but... I'm roosting and crowing three, four, five, and I'm a landlord, and I care. So three doors down from my building on 4th and 10th, they built something right before I bought it, like 17, 18 years ago. They built parking underneath. It's wonderful because none of the old places have parking on their property. That's why they're using that lot for parking, probably for next door. So if you could find, you know, it's not going to pass, it's not going to get my vote unless it has parking underneath it. Because this neighborhood, more than even Biscayne Boulevard, has zero parking. It means Uber, bicycle, walk-around, trolley, whatever. So that's one thing. Number two is this design is horrible for here. It's great for the beach. It's great for, you know, someplace sunny and all that stuff. But right here, this doesn't work. This is an old Mediterranean-style place. They just, around the corner from the gas station, They just restocked and put in new windows in a brand new building or an old building, 1925 building on 10th Avenue. So just one or two north of the gas station on the corner. So if you could keep it in tune with that and not go white box and have some parking there, then you'll be a lot more likely to get my vote at least. But as far as the existing structure now, I didn't even know it was there. And I've been going around the neighborhood forever. So I looked at it last time. It's tucked way in the back. So that's it from me.

Mr. Conley.

Thank you.

We will take those into account.

Yep. Thanks a lot. Quick question. So... In reviewing the demolition plans, what would the site be like when the residence has been removed, the structure's been removed? I know there was the discussion about the existing asphalt, maybe removing it or not. Looks like there's a fence, according to the demolition plan, around three sides. I guess I'm just curious, what if the site stays vacant for an extended period of time? How would you guys leave it? Just... what would it be like, compacted gravel?

Well, number one, we've got to take into account your comment about doing away with the cement part, which we're willing to do.

Get a little closer to your microphone, please. Can you hold the microphone?

Yeah, you can raise the mic up. Thanks. Usually I don't need a microphone. But, yes, we will modify our permit to comply with that request as well. And I'm sure that the property will be fenced in from us. We've had it fenced in before. People would jump the fence and do all sorts of things. But we patrol it. We try to keep them out. I think when the house is no longer there, it will be easier to do that. And at the very least, we won't be running the risk that somebody gets hurt there And, of course, everybody gets sued.

No, no, 100%. I'm not opposed to the demolition or anything like that. I'm just taking this opportunity to ask the question. Like, I see there's some trees on the property. And then there's a tree protection fence detail. But then you can't really see where the fences would be on the site plan. So it's going to be kind of like an intermediate future construction zone. with existing tree protection fences built around the edges? I mean, I think there just should be some stipulations that the site's secure, and I guess you're preserving, it's not clear, I guess you're preserving the existing trees, because there's a fence detail, but there's not, I don't see an arborist report or anything like that. The plans that are submitted in here as additional supporting documents are from 2020. I agree with other board members that it looks more like a development in somewhere else.

I think we'll deal with those issues as we try to get the final plans approved, and it's always going to come before this board, before anything gets done. In the meantime, we will fence the property and make sure that it's secure as part of the demolition process. That's wonderful.

Thank you. Okay, thanks very much. Thank you.

Mr. Powers, do you have any comments? No.

I do. I agree with Mr. as far as paying attention to the trees and also having something designed that's a little bit more in keeping with the neighborhood. And as I said before that project that you guys brought up about being on the corner there, the old gas station, it was absolutely stunning what they did there. And that guy should take a page from that book. That's my only comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Trachtenberg.

So I guess I'm understanding basically what we're going to be approving today based on the Vice Chair's question is that basically we're approving the demolition and there will be some sort of form that comes before us based on the information we provide you today that we will then approve. All that we're approving today is the demolition of the existing structure. Correct?

Yes.

So the site itself is a T4. I looked up the size of your property. This development proposed is 12 units at two stories. There are certain elements in the report that are very specific, like where windows are, where things like... the facade elements are but that's all that doesn't matter based on our approval today correct because that could at any time change when they go and they update their plans correct okay all right so based solely on the concept of there being a 12 unit multi-story t4 type property that's going to bring some sort of housing to the neighborhood and that you will take into account some of your neighbors specifically Mr. Ryan's request to include parking in that development strategy, I would like to move forward with approving this plan. Thank you.

Thank you. And my only question is the recommendations are for the, apply to the proposed project that will come later?

Correct.

And the conditions apply to this non-contributing structure that is going to be demolished?

Correct. So the motion would be... Approve the demolition. Approve the demolition with the... I believe there are four conditions.

Four conditions. Are there any other questions or comments from any of the board members?

Yes. I would like to note that all asphalt and concrete should be removed from the property and, as code requires, asphalt be put in place and the property secure.

So the... There should be a condition five. All hardscape asphalt shall be removed as part of approved demolition.

Sir, I have a question for you. Go ahead. When did your client acquire the property?

I think I have it here. They acquired the property, first of all, as part of a larger purchase of properties. One of those properties was there. I think it was acquired in 2016. So you've held it for some time, close to a decade. Yes.

So to some extent, the owner is partly complicit in the state of disrepair.

We would say no. I'm sure you would. We basically kept the property in the same state it was in. When it was brought to our attention that code violations were involved, we addressed it and got an engineer and he said, you can't fix this property. What was the date of that approximately?

The engineer? When you became aware of the potential violation.

I really don't know the answer to that. I know that in 2024, there was a demolition order.

Okay, so this has been pending for some time. Yes. I think just as a general comment, and more so to my colleagues on the board, Ultimately, if we do approve this, I think it's critical that we convey to the applicant as much information as we can about what we would consider approvable, because this building will come before us. And I think that just as far as granting that applicant as much understanding as the will of this board as possible would be helpful. So I don't know if you feel like you have an understanding of what would be approved. I think it's abundantly clear that what was submitted with this application would not be approved as currently contemplated. That is very clear. I take it that you're the owner of the property, sir? I'm sorry. So I don't know if you guys feel like you have a full sense of what this board would approve or not approve. We have no questions for this board. I think this is an iterative process at this stage.

We have a sense of what you want. We will go see the property that Mr. Ryan mentioned, and we will be working with your staff to bring something to you that you can approve.

Okay. I'm trying to get the address. 1020 Southwest 4th Street. That's the one that was built a couple years before I bought, and it's got a gate, and it's got parking all underneath, and it goes all the way back, so they used all they could, but it blends in. know it's not doesn't stand out but the important part is the parking because it's tough to you know there's a couple big buildings over there there's one that's um kind of an alf senior housing three stories on 10th avenue and it has no parking but they don't that might change right now it's um it's basically old folks and you know visitors coming but once that turns into a real apartment building Where is everyone going to park? So it's a huge issue.

I understand.

Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Chair, may I ask staff a question? Yes, sir. Is it not a standard rule that if a building is desired or applied to be demolished and it comes before you, the owner or the applicant will have to have a development plan before demolition is considered or allowed?

So we request that a redevelopment plan be included as part of the package that is brought to the board so that the board can make its best educated decision.

Okay. The reason why I ask is because we received post the agenda a notification that some plans were submitted. If we didn't receive that addended situation and there was no plan and this building came before us, that's nefarious or has a possible nefarious effect on the area. would we have been able to rule on the demolition or not?

So you can rule on a demolition whether or not there is a redevelopment plan. Okay. Right? So the request is for the demolition. We ask for, I believe, six separate things within the package that we feel are important for the board to see. And again, in order to make their best educated decision on that demolition, one of those things that we request is a redevelopment plan so that there is an idea of what this property will have moving forward. And it's nice to be able to package both approvals at the same time too, right? It saves everybody a lot. In this instance, they had applied for the demolition permit. There was actually some miscommunication. And in the original application that came before you, there was an intent for this to have the redevelopment with it. It just didn't happen. And so that is why this was deferred and is now back before you. But you as the board can vote yay or nay on a demolition permit that does not have, if somebody says we're just not giving it to you,

can't stop them from coming to the board okay thank you one last thought is there any opinion on whether or not before well when unsafe structures says yay and it's a historic building or in a historic district is there any opinion whether that should come before us or that's a staff level thing because like I said before There is some heavy criticism out there towards us on this issue, so I'm just wondering if there's an opinion about that.

All demolition permits should come before the board with the caveat that if there is a structure that has been deemed a threat, an imminent threat to life and safety, that gets signed off by me immediately. And then it becomes an after-the-fact demolition or demolition by neglect in that case. But see, in this case, they have their order. They are now here before you. Once they have their order, then they will have satisfied unsafe structures and us.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, just to build upon what I mentioned earlier, I mean, the area, looking this up, as the designation includes the styles of Mediterranean, Mission, Bungalow, Art Deco, and mid-century modern. Given what has been presented, I'm assuming something along the lines of mid-century modern would be more appropriate. if that's what you choose to go with. And I would urge the architect to do the research, the style of the examples in the area, and hopefully draw some inspiration from those buildings and incorporate some of the elements so that it feels like a compatible building to this neighborhood.

I understand. Anything else?

Go on, Chris. Just one more final comment. And so I guess is it I know it's up to the board, but in your estimation, is the plan to come back here with the proposed new development for this parcel within some period of time?

I think we're obligated under the conditions to do so within six to 12 months. Okay. And we will. You're planning on doing it. Great.

And then, because I'm looking at this.

That will need to, again, that was a recommendation. That should become a condition of this approval.

I'm looking at a street view now. There's some really nice trees on the property. Clearly, you're planning to preserve them. I'm sure that that will be part of your future development plans. There's a fence along the front of the property now. I'm guessing that your team would probably keep that in place. Sounds like you're planning to do a really good job. And then for the future, and this is not necessarily applicable here, although it would be helpful, I guess, maybe if we run into a scenario like this again, if the demolition plan had a fence, how they're proposing to secure the site. In Miami Beach, many years ago, because of so many demolitions were occurring, the city of Miami Beach came up with a strategy that was if you, because people demolish things, and then they may sell them, or they may move on, or they may decide not to develop them, and you could have an unfinished site for an indefinite period of time. So if you don't have a master building permit, when you get your demo permit, they require that you put a nicer fence and you put down temporary lawn and things like that so that the community is not looking at a vacant construction site for a long period of time. So I think if just as us as a board, as we continue to think about these things, we can dial in some of these comments in the future. But that satisfies my questions. Thanks very much.

Are you amenable to re-sodding after demolition?

I guess we would do that and we'll keep the fence to make sure that there's security.

And I guess to be clear, I'm not saying in this case that I think that that should also be a condition that's already been mentioned to remove the asphalt and everything, and it sounds like they're going to secure the site well, and that they're going to come back with new plans, right? But in the future, if these things start happening, then I guess we can continue to delve into how we'd like the properties to be maintained post-demolition. We don't have a plan.

It's a condemned to close out the permit the property has to be sorted anyway, so Little Havana house the historically designated house burned down and They demolished it and sodded it. And actually around the corner from this one, there was a fire at like five in the morning, one morning, crack fire in a bungalow on 10th Avenue, just north of 4th. And that was fenced and sodded. So another empty lot. But we never know what's going to happen in six to 12 months. So if you could fence it and sod it, that'll make it look pretty in the meantime.

for a motion dr i have a motion for you yes sir um i moved to approve the demolition um noting that this was a non-contributing property and i think the it is abundantly clear from the evidence submitted that the property is not safe with that said i would wish to move to approve the demolition with the four conditions submitted my staff with two new additional conditions new condition five requiring the removal of all the pavement and uh in non-porous structures on the property leaving it basically just bare dirt and obviously sought it as required. And condition six, requiring essentially adding the same wording from recommendation number one, changing the should to shall. So the applicant shall submit within six to 12 months with a revised redevelopment plan that has been reviewed by all required agencies and noting that this will return to the historic board for subsequent approvals.

Is there a second? Second. There's a second. Was there some... Are we putting in a requirement for the fence around number five?

Would that not be a default requirement for the property to be secured? Well, then, just for an abundance of clarity, amending condition five to require the property be appropriately secured and fenced.

Right. Yep. Do you accept that?

I accept that.

Okay.

Any discussion on the motion?

Can we have a roll call, please? CALLING MEMBER LUIS, VICE CHAIR LUIS PRIETO Y MUNOZ. YES. CALLING MEMBER HUGH RYAN. YES. CALLING MEMBER NAJEEB CAMPBELL. YES. CALLING MEMBER CHRISTOPHER CAULEY. YES. CALLING MEMBER JOHN S. PEREZ. YES. CALLING MEMBER ROBERT POWERS.

YES.

Calling member Hugh, I'm sorry, calling member Jordan Trachtenberg. Yes. Thank you. And calling chair William Hopper. Yes. Okay. This passes by a vote of eight to zero.

Thank you. Can it be appealed?

Calling Pete, I'm sorry, H, help number five. The file ID is 18647, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section number 23-6.2, subsection B4 of the City Code of Ordinances, approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness, SCOA, or property within the Palm Grove Historic District to permit partial demolition and addition and site improvements to a non-contributing property located approximately at 427 Northeast 72nd Street, Miami, Florida, 33138, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings. For this item, I've also provided the proof of noticing the postcards. You may check them out and pass them. Thank you.

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

My name is Giselle Beloto. I'm the owner of 425 Northeast 72nd Street.

Thanks. And we'll start with the staff report.

Ken Kalmas, Preservation Officer. I ask that the staff report be accepted into the record. Approved. So the request is for addition to the side and rear of a non-contributing structure in the Palm Grove Historic District. You can see the location map. It is a fairly large lot. The House has a number of step backs and primarily their ask is to add another step back on the eastern portion of it, so you can see the historic photo here and the location map. So the minor demolition to the rear of the structure a pergola and exterior kitchen behind that which is not visible from the public right of way. And then a small addition off to the West and rear of the structure which will incorporate similar materials scale and finishes as the primary structure. You can see. The proposed addition at the. Eastern and rear and. Based on existing conditions and proposed conditions. Staff's recommendation is approval with conditions. The site shall be developed in accordance with the plans prepared, as is a standard condition. Standard condition number two regarding manufacturing brochures, color photographs, and et cetera, at the time of permitting. Condition number three is that all glass shall be clear and or low-E. Condition number four is that all glass The resolution shall be included in the master permit set. Condition five is that the trim, the hedges be trimmed to a maximum height of five feet maintained at that point. There is also a horizontal fence at the west side of the property, which is non-congruent with the guidelines. The condition should be that this fence should be removed and replaced with a vertically patterned fence. There's a condition that the applicant add a window to the blank wall at the eastern end. And then 8 and 9 are both standard conditions regarding applicable requirements of Miami 21 Code 17 and Chapter 23 and the city agencies.

Is there anything you'd like to add to the staff report?

No, nothing. It was really good working with Kenneth and his team. They provided a lot of good feedback on how this should look like and I definitely want the house to maintain its historical character. I think the only thing, if I could ask for some consideration of the board, is the requirement of the hedges. Those hedges were there. I've had the property for about a year and a half. They were there when I moved in. They're very old and I was told that if we were to cut them, They're going to die. There's also construction going on right now in the corner on 4th Court Street and 72nd of a multifamily home. So I would prefer to keep the hedges that are there now. so that I can have a little bit more privacy, especially as all this construction is going on in the street. So this would be the only request. The hedges are also, even though I wasn't the one putting them there, there's a whole ecosystem around them. There's all kinds of plants and birds that I see nesting there. So it would just be a shame, I think, to cut that off, and especially if it means that it's going to not recover and may die. So that would be the only thing that I ask.

Okay. We'll discuss that after the public hearing is over. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? So please come forward and give your name and address for the record. If not, I'll close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions or comments, starting with Mr. Lisp.

I have no questions at this time. I think this is a pretty straightforward project. I'm in support. I am also in support of saving the hedges. So I'll leave that there.

Mr. Bruce? I also am supportive. John, can you just speak a little closer to the mic? Yeah, sorry. I'm also in support of keeping the hedges. I understand the trimming of the hedges is to provide visibility to this beautiful house, but I lean towards preserving nature. And I agree with the report. One of the comments that I had when I was looking at the plans is that it would be nice to add a window to the east end wall, and then I saw it on the report, so I totally agree with that.

pretty straightforward I agree with the vice chair I'm comfortable with everything including the hedges Mr. Ryan yeah what is the room that has the blank wall right now

So that's the back room. The one that you see, that's a bedroom. That's the bedroom that's going to get extended.

The new one, okay.

Yeah.

I mean, I like the aerial view. You have the pool and a couple different ways to get to it. No, I think it's a great thing. And I'm a big fan of the hedges. I plant trees for privacy all the time. So, you know, in fact, a lot of times we mandate people to put things up between properties. So keep it.

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Colleague.

I think it looks great in support of everything. Thanks very much. Mr.

Powers.

If I recall correctly, this young lady worked with the neighborhood association with Elisa Cepeda and everything like that, if I recall correctly. Is that not correct, madam?

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear exactly the question.

So the question was you participated in a meeting with the Neighborhood Association.

Yes, yes, that's true. I was there.

All right, and so this project was, she saw it and kind of went through it with you. I agree with the Board. I accept the project the way it is and with the conditions that have been laid out, and I'm also a big proponent of keeping the hedges as well. Thank you very much.

Mr. Trachtenberg? Thank you. I'm a neighbor of yours, so it's nice to see some positive movement in our neighborhood. I hope that the process sounds very seamless, which is great. Are you familiar with the tax ad valorem? I think it's worth checking out as you're doing the process because it allows you to get tax credits towards the improvements of your home, which is good for over 10 years.

Thank you. Yeah, I'll look into it for sure.

So my only comment is the question about a window. Is that something that's problematic for you? Having that there, because that is where you're probably going to put your master.

Yeah, I mean, honestly, I think Kenneth mentioned that in the beginning. I don't mind having the window there. It's fine. I think if it's going to, you know, it's going to add to the historical perspective of the house, I'm fine with the window.

So I will say staff isn't married. To that, there was also, I know in discussions that she'd had with her planner, her preservation planner, there were discussions about using a different textured stucco on the addition to differentiate it. I'm not married to that either, so I will defer to the board.

That's good insight. Yeah, I think it's such a small bump out that it's continuous with the same technique. I would say that... you know, when you're laying out your master suite, you're probably going to put the...

I'm not going to use the window. Right. It's just going to be there for aesthetics.

And typically in Miami 21, because it's an adjoining property or it's adjacent to another property, they're going to ask you in planning to put a slot window.

Okay.

Now, I am okay with that because it's so far back that I would suggest if you're going to put a window, do that so it's elevated and you get natural light. I guess this would be the sunset. And then you can put your your bed below that window.

Yeah, yeah, okay, sure. If that's an option, I'll take it.

Okay, other than that, I look forward to seeing it.

My only question is, is that a palm hedge that we're referring to? Sorry, what was it? The hedge that was mentioned, is that?

It's in the front, yeah.

But what's it made of? Is it palm?

It's not palm. It's To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what that type of hedge is, but it's very unique. It's the only one in the neighborhood. And I was told by the arborist that it's really old, that it's towards the end of its life cycle. And that's why he wouldn't recommend, you know, cutting it down.

Okay. I was just wondering because I didn't see it on the landscape plan.

Yeah, it's right next to the front of the house. It doesn't show up there. I think if you see the aerial image, you may be able to see some of it. Oh, yeah. So if you see the aerial one, yeah, the hedge right.

So there are palms embedded in the hedge.

Yeah, the palms, they're going to stay. There was a recommendation to remove them, and we're not going to remove them. So those would stay anyways.

Okay. Anyone have additional questions?

I have a motion, if you'd wish to hear it.

Sure.

I move to approve with the conditions requested by staff, accepting condition five, which shall be removed, so there is no requirements to trim the hedges. And Jordan, did you believe that the window should be discretionary? I think there's a flexibility built into the ward window. I think perhaps condition seven can then be altered to be just approved at staff level in concert between the homeowner and staff.

Yeah. Okay.

I second.

There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion?

Second.

Any discussion?

Second.

Second. Mr. Trachtenberger already did it.

He was already seconded.

If there's no discussion, can we have a roll call, please?

Yes. Calling Vice Chair Luis Prieto y Munoz. Yes. Calling Member Jordan Trachtenberg. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member Najeeb Campbell. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member Christopher Cauley. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member John Perez.

Yes.

Thank you. Calling Member Robert Powers.

Yes.

Thank you. Calling Member Hugh Ryan.

Yes.

Thank you. This passes by a vote of 8-0.

Do I get to vote?

Thank you so much.

I'm sorry. Calling Chair William Hopper. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And it's really great to see the care that you guys have for the city. So I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you.

And this is a vote of eight to zero.

Right.

Calling help item number six, file ID 18648, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section number 23-6.2 subsection B4 of the city code of ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit alterations and after the fact alterations to a contributing property located approximately at 557 Northeast 66th Street Miami, Florida, 33138, within the Palm Grove Historic District, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Is the applicant present? Is the applicant present?

Yes, sir.

And please give your name and address for the record.

Daniel Cruz, 557 Northeast 66th Street.

Thank you.

We'll start with the staff report. can calm this preservation officer. I ask that the staff report be accepted into the record.

Approved.

So before you is a request for new replacement windows that are not congruent with the historic design guidelines. And then after the fact, SCO a for new driveway also not congruent with the historic preservation guidelines As you can see in the location photo. This is in Palm Grove and the historic photo illustrating the Property with its paired casement windows and two open porches Current existing images SHOW SOME OF THE CASEMENT WINDOWS STILL IN EXISTENCE. SOME HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH AWNING WINDOWS. AND THEN TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT HAS STARTED INSTALLING A DRIVEWAY OF LARGE SLABS LAID ON A BIAS. The applicant's request is to replace the windows with horizontal rollers and a pattern more aligned with the awning windows. It should be noted that our guidelines request windows be replaced with those that match the function, style, and configuration of the original windows when historic documentation is available. We also recommend when a porch is enclosed that that enclosure be representative of the history of that porch. So we would generally recommend something like fixed single pane windows or single pane casement windows if they want something that functions. A recommendation is denial. However, should the board choose to approve the driveway, we do have some recommendations for conditions on that. One of them being that the driveway should match the historic concrete wheel strips to the west side of the property and that it should be limited to no deeper than absolutely necessary for a single vehicle to be parked there. It should also, the wheel strips should be separated by natural turf, and there should be no gravel used between the strips or along the strips.

That's it. Anything you'd like to add to the staff report?

Yeah, I mean, to speak on behalf of the windows, so one of my pushbacks, if I could, is that the style that is being recommended provides very bulky mullions. The style that is being proposed is slider, so it doesn't have the back-to-back I don't know if they're like two and a half, three inch mullions, you know, side by side. I think ideally that would keep with the look of the existing windows, not necessarily in the function, but. in the appearance. The contractor has mentioned that the addition of muntins, which was something that was asked for within the process, can be provided. So a detail was shown on the drawings. I believe that is... Just one second. That would be the A-01 drawing. So that has been added so that the appearance of the existing conditions can be met. So that's honestly kind of like my main concern with the windows. My contractor did kind of move forward with purchasing the windows, so he has them set in a warehouse. I did bring photos, I wasn't sure if I needed to present them before you guys, but I do have them here just in case. And in regards to the driveway, the driveway, when I was speaking with Christina, she mentioned that the layout was fine, the way it's designed. She did give me guidelines, and it showed that there were instances that were, you know, presented in that fashion, and that as long as I met sort of the natural look instead of the gravel, that that would be okay. The only condition she actually told me was the single vehicle. So the fact that she wants it to look similar to the west side is new to me. I was not aware of that. Besides that, Planning and Zoning has already reviewed it. I was unaware that a requirement of one vehicle could be, you know, I would hate to limit, this is a duplex property, so I would hate to limit the tenants to one vehicle. Parking along that street is pretty, it's tough. So I mean, I'd like to provide at least a two vehicle driveway if possible. But I'm open to the considerations that you're willing to propose to me.

Okay. Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item? Please come forward and give your name and address for the record.

Hi, good afternoon. Alisa Cepeda, 531 Northeast 76th Street. This hasn't been discussed with us, so I don't really have many comments, and I'm okay with what staff has proposed. This is a little bit concerning. considering that we're going to park cars all the way around this building. So I think that we do need to consider how many parking spaces that we're putting in and how much we're changing the property. As far as the windows, we're okay with staff's recommendation, but this is really, you know, the agenda is the first time we've seen anything. So thank you.

Anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this item? You had a rebuttal?

May I have, just to add, I did, as part of the process, PZD 5 was a report that was required in terms of going around Palm Grove and taking pictures of properties with similar style windows. I believe I provided 12 properties. Of course, I can't verify that they're actually sliders. From afar, they give the appearance. So just along my street, there's way more sliders and double hung windows than there are the casement style windows. So it's a little, I completely respect the recommendations to provide the original look of the building. It's just a little frustrating that so many properties within the Palm Grove District don't seem to follow that appearance. And I'm not saying that they should, I'm not saying anything about that. I'm just, I was under the assumption that because the property is not a designated historic property, that those requirements were not necessarily absolutely mandatory.

It's contributing, right? Yes, it is.

It is. It's contributing, so it is designated like the whole district. I think what happened was you did the driveway and got nabbed, and then all this stuff came out because you didn't talk to him first.

I'm a member of the public who wishes to speak.

Yeah, my name is William Arthur. Were you sworn in before?

Nope. I just got here.

May you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony that you will give will be the truth and nothing but the truth?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you. Go ahead.

Yeah, my name is William Arthur. I am the board member of MIMO, Biscayne Boulevard Historic District, and also the president of Bayside Residents Association. I serve with Bob Powers on the Memo-Biscayne Boulevard Historic District, and he is not able to come tonight. He's here.

He's here remotely. Fantastic. He is participating.

He's listening right now. So I just wanted to comment. We've been in several meetings where this particular property has come up, and Mr. Powers has given this gentleman... several warnings about not doing this driveway. And so I just want for the record that someone who sits on your board has given this gentleman many different advice and counsel on this. And he decided to not take that advice. So I just wanted that for the record. Thank you.

Anyone else from the public? I want to close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions or comments, starting with Mr. Prieto-Vimunos.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just for an abundance of clarity, as we kind of dissect this, could you just parse which part is the after-the-fact permit and which part is being sought under the regular permitting process?

The driveway is after-the-fact. The windows are not? The windows are not installed. Understood, but they have been purchased?

The contractor went ahead and purchased with the understanding, in his opinion, that it was not going to be required.

So they're not installed? The contractor just, on his own volition, decided to order these beforehand?

Yes, sir. They're in his warehouse. They're not installed.

Okay. So they're in the contractor's possession. All right. That's clear. And so the driveway was done without a permit, in effect?

Yes, sir. Okay.

All right. Yeah, I don't see any reason to go too far past staff's recommendations. I think this is a pretty cut and dry situation. But I'll leave it there for now.

I agree with staff recommendation. With the exception of limiting the parking to one parking space, I worry that simply providing one parking space isn't going to make... Speak a little closer. Sorry. I worry that only providing one parking space isn't going to make the people that live there only have one car. It's just going to make it... There's a higher chance of people just simply parking on the dirt or the grass in the back or in the neighborhood, in the sidewalk, which is obviously a concern in the city of Miami. So that's my only opposed amendment to it. I agree with everything else.

Mr. Campbell.

Likewise, I agree with the vice chair with the staff recommendations, and I also agree with my colleague about some flexibility with the driveway with the future tenants.

Mr. Ryan? Just ask staff, the two parking strips, that's the original, correct? Correct. And that's on the what? On the west side. East side, they took that out and they did those modern rectangles from the building to looks like the property line, correct?

So there's sod to the rear, but yet the Based on this plan, the driver goes from the street to the end of the structure.

But it goes beyond the setback to the property line? I mean, the picture I have from the sidewalk has it from the building to the fence.

The picture does not seem to correspond to the plan.

So this is, if I'm correct, the driveway is not finished.

No, sir, it was stopped. There was a stop work order on it. Regardless, I mean, it's way out of line. And what happened, you know, we've had, what, two or three of these where the windows have been installed for whatever reason, and then we've had to redo it. Now, I understand your contractor or somebody went on their own, went rogue and bought all these windows, unfortunately, without figuring out what to do. It is a contributing structure, so it does abide by these rules. Regardless... You've got to go through the city and get a permit for this stuff. So if you can get a permit for the driveway, you're probably going to pop the windows in on the weekend or whatever. No, sir. It's fine. I'm not going to assume anything. But you're right. You probably would have done it correctly. But I like it. Since they're not in, I agree with the staff 100%. Now, the one thing with the parking, you know, they're duplexes. They're big units, right? Two-bedroom? Yes, sir. Two-bedroom? They've got to have more than one spot, at least two, maybe three if they have a guest, which takes you back to the rear of the building at least. So that would be my thought.

Mr. Conley?

Yes, I agree with everything everybody said. Sounds unfortunate about the windows. That's a bummer. And with regards to the driveway, it sounds like staff's just asking for the two concrete bands to be placed, right? So you'd have that on both sides of the property is what I'm guessing from understanding the drawings?

Correct.

So it sounds like you stopped the driveway midway through. Obviously, This is bad luck. You weren't informed properly, or maybe you were... Sorry that this happened, but I think that the straight thing to do is to try and keep it consistent with the staff recommendations and move on. It's a beautiful little building, though, and it's going to be...

I'm just trying to make it another beautiful building towards the Palm Grove District.

Yeah, and I'm sure it's going to be great when it's done, so...

Good luck. Even though the green paint was never approved. So it's not mine. It was how I bought it. So I'm sorry. I do have a COA to paint it white, so it'll be nicer.

That's what I'm assuming. I mean, you can tell that you're trying to improve the property and that you just got caught up in this scenario. So I agree with staff's recommendations and the other board members as well. Mr. Powers.

Good afternoon. Conversations with Daniel had happened a number of times. When he first moved in, I introduced myself and let him know that I sat on the Board of the Historic District. And I also made him aware that anything that he did to the front of that building, he was gonna have to come in and see the Historic Preservation Officer. Anything he did. I even pointed out the windows that I did, and I can't afford to do all my windows all at once either, because it's a very expensive proposition. And I showed him the windows that I did, and those got approved through the Board without me being involved in that process at all. So this young man was, I also did his tree, when he had a contractor come in and they cut down all the trees across the front of the building, much to everybody's dismay, I also did his tree survey for him so that he could replace the trees that he needed to replace, which he did, and he planted them in the back of the property and I helped him with that. So to say that he didn't know and was not aware, I kind of find that, upsetting to me because I made it very clear to him from the very beginning that nobody really cared what he did to the back of the building, but he certainly needed to be aware of what was going on in the front of the property. The other thing also is that whole neighborhood is a tandem parking neighborhood and has been for years and years and years. All the parking on my building before the neighborhood was historic was all down along the east side of my building for four cars to park back there. His side of the building, his east side of the building, he can put three cars back there, and he could even do parking in his backyard if he wanted to and do some type of a paving situation there. There's also, by the way, ladies and gentlemen, when that house was, when I bought my home 25 years ago, there was a fence all the way across the front of that house, and there was no parking on that side. until Joaquin Fernandez bought that house and took down the fence and put in a new one and used to park his boat on the east side of the house, much to everybody's dismay. And he had room on the west side for three cars to park. So there is plenty of room there for people to park automobiles. You just have to be in conversation with your tenants, like I have to be, that the person who goes in first is going to be the person who comes out last. So, you know, I'm just saying that that's the program over there. And so, and I might add as well, gentlemen, is that you had not too long ago a property over on 63rd Street that our board required them to turn the driveway, turn the parking so that there was no parking facing the street. I mean, to the point where those people were so frustrated they never even bought their house. So the thing about this is this. He wants to concrete in, he's literally concreted in the entire front of his house. The entire front of that house has been concreted in. And I told him when he was doing it not to do it. Repeatedly told him not to do it. And he concreted all the way over to the property line and all the way to the back of the house. So Please forgive me if that's wonderful that you guys all agree. I live next door to him, and I told him not to do that, and that there were other ways to solve his problem, and he just chose to do his own program. That's all. I even told him about the windows. I pointed out what he had to do with the windows. Well, I already bought them, and I said, well, that's a shame. Why would somebody buy a window after you've already told them they live in a historic district? The day he bought the house, he knew he... lived in a historic district because he was told, and he was also told his house was contributing. So please forgive me. It's one thing to cut somebody some slack, and it's another thing to cut somebody slack who actually deserves it. I don't know. I mean, you know, I don't know how many times you can tell somebody maybe you should not do that, and they did it anyway. So you gentlemen, I don't agree with you. I think that he has four parking spots across the front of his property. He has three down the side. He has seven parking spaces there. So I don't know what he's talking about that he needs more parking. He doesn't. Yes, we have shared parking in that area, and we have a restaurant up the top of the street that sometimes they take up the parking, but that's mostly until about 10 o'clock at night. Then after that, there's plenty of parking on the street. So I live there. So before all you other guys want to give your comments, perhaps you ought to listen to that. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Trachtenberg.

I guess by all the other guys, he means me. So I know that the area does have parking issues. There is that taco place on the corner and also Legion Park that has the Saturday morning park-a-thon. Yes. So I agree with the rest of the board in that it would be okay to have two spaces there. I don't see the reason for it to go all the way back to the back of the property because you do have... That's fine.

I mean, I'll meet it to the two. Right before the air conditioning. The strip parking?

Yeah. So there's AC in the plan.

In strips?

In strips, yes. I feel like that's a great middle ground because you'll be able to have the two spots. I don't know how that works in regards to city, because I looked. There wasn't a curb cut. I guess there must be not a big enough jump there for your cars to get in.

I'm not sure.

Yeah. But in regards to the windows, yeah, my only concern would be egress, but it seems like, based on what I'm reading here, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the central, the porch, former porch window D is gonna have a central emollient, so that will be a slider window, right? So we'd be able to have, I think, egress requirements met For fire escape?

Yeah, all the windows were meeting the egress requirements.

Yeah, well, if you make a fixed panel that faces the street, you see what I'm saying? But then I understand that on the west side of the building, you're having a vertical... So that will be a slider, I would imagine, right? Is that what we're proposing?

So again, the request is he replace the existing windows with sliders, which are not congruent with the guidelines, right? Correct. So staff would approve administratively casement windows. So if the board is amenable to horizontal rollers...

Yeah, I mean, my only issue is the egress. I mean, I personally don't have an issue with the mullions. What I'm seeing in the drawings here, this is what you're proposing. These are the windows that you've purchased, right?

Yeah, what you see there is the style that will appear.

So I personally, from an aesthetic standpoint, don't have an issue. I think the fixed window that used to be a screen feels a bit heavy. I think it might be a bit heavy from a fixed window standpoint.

But, yes, what are your... Can I add another thing on the recommendations? Is it three doors on the left elevation, the A's? Those are being recommended as solid doors with a very small light window. My contractor said that I can't get anything that is, what is it, the hurricane rated. It seems like the appearance of a solid door with the casement style windows would kind of look odd in my opinion. So I don't know if there's a different approach to that or whether you... You're referring to the front door? To those side doors there. So that bottom left one and then there's two at the top. Yeah. They're solid right now with a little bit of a window.

So I'm on the opinion side that I can't see that door from the street. So I don't have an opinion on to why we should have what you're asking for, what they're proposing.

We can work. We're happy if you want to change the condition. We can work out to a door that is architecturally appropriate and meets impact-resistant standards. All right. yeah um and usually for architecturally appropriate we give people a choice between solid solid with glass or glass so we can come up with a solution there yeah the proposal was was the wood with the additional mountains to match the historical look so if that can be revisited yes we're happy to revisit that

Yeah, that would be great. I know the complexities of the window situation. It's unfortunate that you've already bought them, but even if you hadn't bought them, I would still want to talk with you about the right strategy here, because it's not always the right strategy what may be in front of you. I think a lot of the windows that we're going to be seeing from the street, you know, Again, the fixed panel window, just so that I understand, for, what is it, G and H, what you're proposing is a...

Is it a hung window? So the double hung is only at the bathroom. That's the really skinny one. That's the only double hung one because it's for air filtration. But the H were supposed to be just fixed, single with muntins, and the middle one was a slider.

And the middle one was a slider. And what is being recommended is a fixed panel, single pane,

The recommended for G is a casement window. I believe the H is as fixed.

And you having issues with that?

I'll take what you guys recommend.

What I would recommend is that anything that's facing the street, that we can see from the right of way, and if anybody would like to chime in here, it's also fine, especially when it comes to the front door, and I guess C, H, G, and D, if you have already purchased those and they're not aligning with what we're asking for, I think that's, you know, it is what it is, but the things that we can't see.

Do the sides apply as well?

Yeah, so I would say the things that we can't see, so things in the rear of the property.

Right, that has been approved. Oh, that's been approved. Yeah, without conditions.

Okay. So in that regard, then I would just then proceed with staff's recommendation other than the doors that we can then work with staff to figure out the right strategy. Thank you. Sounds good. All right. So then, if I was to make a motion, I'll reiterate, I guess.

I was just going to ask you what you were proposing for Windows C. Would that include additional mountains?

For Windows C? Yeah. Yeah, as described by staff, it doesn't seem like there's an issue there. Okay. trying to find, obviously, a good middle ground. But I think the right strategy, to recap, just so that we're all on the same page, is that the parking strategy will be that you're gonna go to the single strip, I mean the double strip, tandem parking for two spots. basically limiting you to, I guess, what's that, 36? Yeah, I was going to ask about that. Yeah, 36 feet, which would be two spaces, right?

Okay, that's fine.

And that the windows would be in line with what staff is recommending, but the door that, was that door?

So to be clear, staff is recommending denying his window application.

Right. But there were recommendations for changing the types, right? Jordan, do you mean what staff would approve? What staff would approve.

Staff will approve casement windows that match the original.

That's what I'm referring to. Maybe it's not that it's describing the conditions. I was reading the segment where you're describing your recommendations, and I'm referring to those recommendations.

Right, with the, I guess, the doors being... And then the doors being the one that's...

for you and staff to figure out the right strategy. Understood.

Yes. Unrelated, but I think it's... I haven't finished yet. Oh, sorry.

So the recommendations, any conditions for the windows would be taken from the recommendations that were on page 10 of 12.

It would be the staff analysis, page 10.

Okay. Now, Mr. Perez.

Again, unrelated, but I think it's related. Has the fence been addressed in the Historic Department?

John, if you can speak closer.

Yes, sorry. This is regarding the fence. Yes. It appears to be a picket fence that was later filled in with wood, which I know for a fact is not allowed by zoning. It needs to have visibility through if it's six feet. It's also not allowed by public works due to the visibility triangle. which also adds a level of liability. When you're exiting the property, you need to have a 10-foot divisibility triangle. And I realize that's not what we're discussing here. I just want to let you know that. But is there a criteria within the historic guidelines similar to the consideration of the hedges and all the fences?

There are fence guidelines for, yes.

Should this property not be required to comply with them?

So if this fence is a pre-existing non-conforming condition, no, right? If he goes to change the fence, then he needs to come into compliance with the guidelines.

Okay. So in other words, the fence was there before the historic district was established.

Yeah, I checked the Google Earth in 2007. It was already there.

Okay. Now, in order for it to be non-conforming, there would have to be a permit showing wood applied onto the picket fence, which I doubt that was the case. I don't know. Maybe this is more of a code compliance matter, but I would encourage you. to remove them, even just from a liability standpoint, at least the portion related to the 10-foot visibility triangle.

Mr. Collins, could that be added as a condition in this instance, contingent on approval of the after-the-fact permit condition on compliance of the fence? So I don't know if we can condition removal of the fence.

I mean, I think if the fence is, is a legal non-conforming fence, then I don't, he isn't touching it, so you can't really require him to touch it.

Okay, can I ask a question? Yes, sir. So, just out of curiosity, could you just say very briefly what's happening? You're painting the house, trying to put new driveways, trying to fix it up. Are you planning to keep the fence? It's not helping the aesthetics.

Yeah, I wasn't planning on keeping it.

Right, so do you mind just telling us a little brief of then what's going on?

I'm just trying to provide parking on the west side.

Let me clarify. I'm sorry. Your drawings are really tricky to understand. There's not a lot of information on them, and that's not a criticism. It's just it's hard to understand what the goals are of the project, right? So like the fence, I would think that clearly if you're going to demo a partially built driveway and all that kind of stuff, you're doing these improvements. Maybe you don't want to keep that fence as it is, so... Do you mind just clarifying for us so we know?

No, I was not planning on touching the fence.

But... How are you going to get the driveway there?

Then again, just for clarification, if it's not a legal fence, you can't... Like, if you have to change the windows to be... meaning some sort of guideline, wouldn't the fence have to be that way?

If he does not touch the fence, if the fence is a legally non-conforming fence, meaning it is legal, until he touches it, he is not required to. Once he changes the fence, it must come into conformance. But if he's not touching it, I can't force him to

I guess I would have an issue with saying if it is a legal non-conforming fence who is in charge of determining if indeed it is a legal non-conforming fence.

So if there's no violation, meaning that there's been no violation on the fence, is there a violation on the fence? There's no violation on the fence to our knowledge. So we would either have to do some research to find out if it's there, but typically if it's in one of our survey photos or if it's in our older files as being there, at some point we just deem it as legally non-conforming. So the plan reviewer for this case was very thorough, so I doubt that she missed it. Even though she's no longer with us, I seriously doubt that she would have missed that. I would say that. So unless the applicant is willing to change the fence, you cannot require him to change the fence.

If it's legal non-conforming, I understand.

If it's legal non-conforming.

It's a code compliance matter where code compliance hasn't probably looked at this. That's it, I'll leave it at that.

But you're going to paint the fence to look like the house?

Like I said, I wasn't planning on touching it.

Because if you touch it, you can pressure clean it.

I mean, just out of curiosity, could we make a condition that we think, like, you know... I mean, because is there an aluminum picket fence that has wood applied to it? Is that what's happening?

It's just there were wood slats in between the pickets.

It's there until they rot. So we can't do anything about the fence until he comes with an application to do something about it.

Okay.

Or it falls down. Now, I have one final question, and that is, Is a curb cut required for that new driveway for zoning or public works?

That would be determined by public works at the time of planning.

And that would be inherent in our condition number six? Or seven?

Yeah, because it would have to comply with all the other.

Number seven.

They would. They would need a curb cut. Okay.

ready for a motion i have just one i'm sorry small question um the horizontal rollers in particular c window c you've already purchased the rollers and they have the applied mountains already or are you going to apply the mountains after the fact they can apply it after the fact okay

Okay, ready for a motion? I'd like to make a motion.

Go ahead. I'd like to make a motion that actually helped me here. I'm denying the denial. I'm making an approval. How would you word this?

I'm not sure what you're trying to do.

Jordan, if I may hazard. Yes. I think the intent would be you want to approve the after-the-fact permit for the driveway with the conditions discussed, and then you were going to refer the item of the windows to be approved by staff. Correct.

Okay, so I'd like to approve the after the fact permit with the seven conditions with the change of number three to state that the driveway shall be concrete wheelchips for the minimum length of 36 feet and no wider than 10 feet.

Minimum or maximum?

A maximum length of 36 feet for two cars and no wider than 10 feet. I'd also like to add in that the doors that were discussed on record would be determined between staff and the applicant.

Is there a second? Second. There's a motion in the second is there any discussion of those have one question as far as the windows. Go ahead, Mister Ryan first.

The windows okay, the recommendation just to clarify without going letters and all the stuff the front of the building. At least or maybe the whole building, you're recommending going to casements and then the one was one screen. um openings is going to be a fixed or casement single pane glass like one light is that more or less correct for staff i'm sorry

So, right, so window should be double casement with three muntins per C and D. Single casement window for F. Second floor window is G, H, and D. G, H, and D. And office window D. Should keep the central mullion. Okay. Again, your question, I'm sorry.

The question was the front elevation. or was it the entire building that your recommendation is to go to casements? Correct. Okay, that's fine. As long as it wasn't about putting on, gluing on stuff on sliders. So if we do casements, then yes, small floor denial.

Mr. Powers, you had some discussion?

Yes, sir. Go ahead. So we're doing casement windows for the front of that house, is that correct?

So let me be clear. The request is nonconforming windows. Staff's recommendation is to deny the application, right?

Okay. So we're denying the fact that he wants to use rollers because he should be using casement windows. Is that correct?

That is staff's recommendation to deny the application to use horizontal, right. There is. And then of course, in order for the east side of powers, please don't speak over me. There is discussion ongoing as to the appropriate treatment for specific windows on the upper portion of what was historically the open porch. Right. Staff's recommendation is to deny the driveway, but there were conditions based on potential board approval. The motion before us is to approve based on staff's recommendations for the windows, which would mean denying the windows. And to the windows that would eventually be approved at staff level if they came in at casement.

Exactly. This goes back to my original question. Am I approving or denying? But yes, that's what I understand.

So I believe the motion should be to deny the application of It should be modified to deny the application for the non-congruent windows, but to approve the driveway with the following conditions. Is that correct, James?

That's correct. Okay, I'd like to amend my motion. In case the applicant wishes to appeal, it would appeal the denial.

Got it. Okay, so I'd like to amend my motion under that sequence of words.

Thank you.

As a second, I accept the amendment.

Are we all clear on what's happening?

Okay, so and also part of that amendment was to require him to have a curb cut put in in order to have parking on the east side of the house. Is that correct?

that would be required by Public Works. And that condition, yeah, that would fall under condition six and seven.

Okay, because there's never been parking on that side of the house ever before.

Okay. No. Any other questions on the motion? Okay, can we have a roll call, please?

Calling member Jordan Trachtenberg.

Yes.

Thank you. Calling Vice Chair, Luis Prieto y Munoz. Yes. Calling Member, Najeeb Campbell. Yes. Calling Member, Christopher Cauley.

Yes.

Calling Member, John Perez.

Yes.

Calling Member, Robert Powers.

Yes.

Calling Member, Hugh Ryan.

Yes.

And calling Chair, William Hopper.

Yes.

Okay, this is as amended by a vote of eight to zero. And this is appeal, this decision is final unless appealed to the hearing board's office within 15 days.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Calling HEP item number seven, file ID 18650, a resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2, subsection before of the city of code of ordinances, approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness SCOA for property within the Bayside Historic District to permit after-the-fact demolition, new construction, and site improvements on a vacant lot located approximately at 708 Northeast 68th Street, Miami, Florida, 33138, further incorporating the analysis and the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

As the applicant present, please give your name and address for the record.

Caroline Berther, 708 Northeast 68th Street.

Giacomo Berther, 708 Northeast 68th.

Thank you, and we'll start with the staff report. Kenneth Kalmas, Preservation Officer. I ask that the staff report be accepted into the record.

Approved.

So the request is for an after-this-fact special certificate of appropriateness for demolition, which occurred due to an... imminent threat to life and safety, and new construction at 708 Northeast 68th Street. Here you can see the location of the property in the Bayside Historic District. I'm sorry. And the historic image of the structure that was on the property site. rectilinear gable-ended structure. For context, you can see some of the structures along Northeast 68th Street.

And when was this demolition?

The demolition occurred, bear with me, March 1st, 2022. So the proposal is for a single-story rectilinear gable-ended structure with the ends featuring parapet walls ornamented in stone. The front will be broken into primarily three bays. an entrance bay with an eyebrow, a double bay with windows to the west, and a single bay to the east. You can see the renderings. So it'll be a scored stucco on the end and smooth stucco on the front with a feature around the entrance, again, of stone. You can see the site plan. They're introducing two smaller driveways to either side of the structure and a paved walk. And you can see the materials. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL WITH OUR STANDARD CONDITIONS REGARDING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITTING SUBMISSIONS, GLASS, AND RESOLUTIONS. WE DO ADD THE CONDITION THAT ALL THE STONE CLADDING SHALL BE There is, I believe, an outstanding issue with a tree, and that we want to condition that that be satisfied during construction.

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

We purchased our property in, sorry. We purchased the property in 2024. We are a family. We are building our family home. We try to take in consideration the elements of the street and try not to compete with the surrounding homes. But it is something that we are trying to create a functional home for our family. Our daughter goes to school in the area. We're very excited that the park just opened up an access point on 67th Street. Again, just wanting to honor the district, but create a functional home for our family. And as I mentioned, we bought a vacant lot. We didn't demolish it, but we are here trying to create our family home. And we've also worked with our reviewer for 12 months now. So there's been a lot of thought put into it.

So I will add with regard to the demolition by neglect ordinance, it's our understanding that the structure is not as tall as the historic structure, maintains a floor area ratio less than the previous structures on the property, and does retain a gable-ended form.

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

Hi, my name is William Arthur again. I'm president of Bayside Residents Association and I wanted to welcome you. I haven't met you yet, but welcome to Ernie Red.

We reached out a couple times.

Yeah, well, it's funny because one of the reasons why I'm here is we have not, this was not presented to our Architecture and Historic Board or committee. And the first time I actually saw these renderings was during the, about a week ago when it was posted. So that's one of the reasons why I'm here. Not to be contentious, because we welcome you in the neighborhood and we welcome families. So we're glad you're here and you're trying to improve our neighborhood. This house was really special. Just so that you know, you are in a section of our neighborhood called Elmira, which is one of the oldest... It is the oldest section of Bayside Historic District and probably the third most historic district in the city of Miami. You could correct me if I'm wrong. But we really cherish that street. And that street has... kind of devolved into kind of whatever, as you saw from the lineup, it used to be the most historic street in Miami and in our neighborhood. And now, one contributing structure at a time, these buildings have been knocked down for whatever reason. We believe that it's up to the Historic Preservation Board to ensure that if a contributing structure is knocked down, that whatever is rebuilt there, has a wink or a nod to the existing structure that was there. And that existing structure came from that neighborhood that was originally occupied by these Dutch Calvinist society that came there and the structure that's right next to it is owned by a gentleman. And that was their community center and this particular property had a lot of relevance because it actually had some of that Dutch colonial revival style to it. Well, we've been asking, historic, and you've heard me, Savannah, and we've had separate meetings about this. You guys voted on a similar situation on 888 Northeast 71st Street, where I came and I spoke on behalf of what was being built there. This is a beautiful, it's a beautiful home, and it's going to suit their needs, and we're happy about that. And we want to work with you to make sure that whatever you guys build here will suit your needs. But you bought into an historic district, and what we care about is preserving the community. character of our neighborhood, the historic character of our neighborhood, particularly this street. This street has seen a lot of demolition, has seen a lot of these contributing structures go by the wayside, and all we're asking the HEP Board to do is to re-look at the design and say, where can we look at the design of the house that was there, and bring back something of that design. Or at the very least, there are five or six styles from frame vernacular to Mediterranean revival to memo to modern, you know, to streamline modern. There are several historic styles that you could have just said, hey, listen, stick to one of those. And I know Savannah You and I vehemently disagree on this, and I think you and I probably do too. But all we're asking the board to do is, this is a historic neighborhood. Our argument with 888 Northeast 71st Street is that there was a comment that was made on that, and it kind of pertains to this issue. And that was, at that October 7th meeting, one of the board members said that your job is to evaluate each of these individual properties solely on the merits of that property, independent of the historic district context. And what we're saying to you is, no. That's what makes an historic district historic and interesting. That's what keeps the integrity of our historic neighborhood is by looking at each contributing structure in the context of the rest of the neighborhood. And I think that's where you and I, we agree on that. And we don't feel that this design does that. It doesn't move to that level. And we're just asking for some changes just to Make it so it fits what was there or at least fits what was in the neighborhood. This doesn't look anything like anything in the neighborhood. It's beautiful, but it doesn't look like our neighborhood. And that's what's happening in our neighborhood, is a bunch of homes are being built that look nothing like what was there or what's in our neighborhood currently. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this item?

Yes, ma'am. Hello again. Elisa Cepeda, 531 Northeast 76th Street. So I agree with Mr. Arthur's comments. It's a lovely house, beautiful design, but this is something that is eroding all of our historic neighborhoods at this point. We have things that are knocked down. We have people come back, however they acquired the property, whatever the situation is, and we have something brand new brought in. The look, the feel, the character, you know, the style. If we don't try and preserve some of this, what do we end up with in another five or ten years? I mean, this affects whether it's Bayside, Palm Grove, Morningside. I mean, it affects all the neighborhoods. This was something that I've come to you guys. I mean, this has been going on for years to deal with the demolition by neglect situation. This was born out of that. I mean, if we keep allowing things to be built and there's nothing left of the likeness, the style, the character, the feel, we end up with brand new neighborhoods. So I'm not sure how to rectify this at this point, but we can't just keep allowing things to pop into the neighborhoods and there's no regard for how the pieces pop in and how they fit. Thank you, guys.

Anyone else from the public? There's some time to respond.

I think also we have taken consideration. I did my research on Elmira. Part of the Dutch settlers were also from upstate New York. We tried to create something that did have similar proportions. Unmassing the original structure was a two and a half story structure. Yes, we are a one-story bungalow, but we are hitting peaks that mimic a two-story. There was siding used in the original structure. We have formed horizontal stucco on the sides of the structure to mimic siding. So we have thought through. We also, I know that there is some larger scale windows. A contributing house on the street on the Elmira District also has similar use of windows. So we, I mean, this architect, he was going to say the same thing. So yes, I understand that. Some of the houses on the street have taken a different look and feel, but we really did try to take all of that into consideration when designing this family home. And I guess I keep reiterating family because we're not developers. We're not trying to flip the house. We see ourselves as long-term residents who want to contribute to this community.

Thank you. I will now close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions or comments. Thank you for that suggestion.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. I was going to commend you on your attempt here, because you have the opportunity to build a lot of square footage, and the lot itself would afford you quite a substantial home. and the fact that you are minimizing your footprint to what you need rather than maximizing it for what typically happens is a flip from some sort of spec home builder. I also appreciated the nuanced details that you attempted to achieve with the reference to the old home. So from a design standpoint, obviously there's a lot of different ways approach this site but I think the way that you've done it is is interesting it's different you're you're creating a sort of a reasonable footprint for the street because I'm sure you're familiar it's a very small street right so from let's say a a process of had you recognized a what your neighbor has said about meeting with them and all of that, had you gone through that process, I don't know that you would have veered far from this in the end, except for maybe you would have been pushed into a two-story structure, which actually I would be against, because I like the scale that you're proposing of it not being a two-story structure. It's unfortunate that this design came with such a burden past. The site, I should say, came with a burden past because there's a long history of this conversation about demolition by neglect that supersedes you guys proposing that, as you can see from what you've heard just now, it's a big problem that we're having. And your site, unfortunately, is an example of demolition by neglect. So I would say that my lean on this is definitely complimentary. I reserved some comments because I was expecting to go actually after everybody, but I reserved some comments for the next round. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Powers. Mr. Powers, are you still with us? If not, Mr. Colley.

Yes, hello, nice to meet you both. Thanks a lot for being here. I'm very familiar with that street, and I agree with Mr. Trachtenberg here that I think that, I've got the elevations up on the screen, I guess, we can all see them. I think that the scale is great, and I think that it's, I mean, it's a new residence, right, in a historic, district, historic neighborhood. And I think you did a wonderful job. And I think your architect did some really creative things here. I'm looking at the front elevation that's up on the screen. and that that plane or that volume that's around the front door um that material there trying to review the drawings and talk at the same time what is the is that like a stone finish around the door there yes 11 store stone to mimic the stone that is being used on the sides yeah it's really cool i mean And I mean, you know, and it's like a natural stone, like an oolite or something like that. So in some ways that recalls natural oolitic stone walls and a lot of the materials that, you know, would have been utilized. And that's it. I mean, I'll reserve maybe if I have any other questions, I'll mention them. But again, great job. And it's going to be a beautiful addition to the neighborhood from my point of view.

Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Campbell. Mr. Ryan, I didn't see you. I'm sorry. I thought you had left. No, Mr. Campbell, sorry.

Thank you. Very interesting project, very interesting design. I just have a couple detailed questions about what's going on. Mr. Collier just asked about that, the massing of the entry concrete wall. And on the renderings I have, it's like a brick-looking texture. It's stone, sorry. But on the presented elevation, it looks like the coral rock. So which one is it? It's going to be...

It'll be like that.

The two parapets. Okay, so that's cleared up. Okay. Now, with the two, and I do appreciate the Dutch slab pediment as a reference, I'm trying to figure out now the wooden siding. Maybe it's a question for your architect, actually.

It was formed stucco to mimic siding.

Can I talk to him, please?

Could you give your name and address for the record first? Ralph Tate. 11820 Miramar Parkway. Thank you. Miramar, Florida.

Hello, my friend. How are you? How are you? Good job. The wooden siding, I'm trying to figure out from the drawings whether they're applied to the keystone, the coral rock, or is it inserted into and sunk beneath the surface level of the rock? And then is it, how are you applying the wood, or is it even wood itself? What's going on?

It's not wood. It's squirt stucco.

Scored stucco.

Yes. Would you get a little closer to the microphone? It's scored stucco. Basically what we do, we do it all the time where you may do it in six inch increments.

Okay.

Then we have it revealed and that gives you the illusion of wood without actually applying wood.

Okay. So it's going to be the keystone or coral rock, whatever you want to call it, is just that band.

Correct.

Yes. And then immediately underneath, it's concrete still, but it's just scored as siding. Correct. Yes.

So you have a stucco, you score it.

Okay.

That illusion.

Last question. Back to the front elevation, the glazing, the windows that you use, there's a full length to the left, right? And then another set of glazing to the right. Are these operable windows? Are they going to be operable or fixed?

Those are going to be operable windows.

Okay. All right. Thanks. Thank you. Good job.

Thank you. Mr. Perez.

I think, again, I agree with my colleagues. It's a very interesting design. It's creative. It's unique. i've been on this board for too long but i do i'm starting to appreciate and value the neighborhood associations that are part of these communities and i guess even though i think it's a beautiful design it would be a little challenging for me to simply prove it considering the neighborhood can't hear you What's that?

Speak into your microphone.

The neighborhood associations and the mechanisms that they've put in place have not been gone through. If anything, just have a dialogue with them. I'm a big believer in, you know, it's a beautiful design. I think it's got beautiful materials. It's creative. But I would think it's important to meet with them. That's it.

I'm not denying that either. We actually reached out a couple of times. So our apologies, but we definitely did reach out and do our due diligence. We were advised by our advisor. I couldn't initially find the exact association. Then she gave us it. Our architects have reached out. So it was not for lack of trying, truly.

Mr. Colmus, during your introduction of the staff report, you mentioned an outstanding issue with the tree. Could you expound on that, please?

So I do know that there's a tree permit that has not been fully settled.

It was an after-the-fact tree permit. We hired a licensed arborist to come check out. We had a large royal poinciana. Sorry, we had two poincianas and a mango. During his evaluation... the mango he determined had brown mold, and that there was a royal Ponciana that had rooted on a wall at the back of the property, and the canopy was over a neighboring lot. Sadly, he wasn't as versed in the law as we had hoped or thought. So he deemed them hazardous and removed them without permit. However, the law stipulates that there must be a structure, like a home on the property that we didn't have. So when we were flagged, his reports didn't... So we have gone through all of the channels now. So we have paid towards the tree fund, and as part of the stipulation is that we do have a replanting program. We just have asked that we do it during, like around the construction, or after construction, not after, but just so we don't damage said trees while building our home.

That makes sense. I think I align very much with Mr. Perez to my right. I think it's a beautiful property. I think the house that's proposed here is tasteful and it's lovely and it's inventive and it's creative. And I think the fact that you fall so short of what you could do by right is encouraging. At the same time, when I look at a street view of that street, Five years ago, and I look at where this property was, it's really jarring to see what's happened. It's really overwhelming to see what was a, you know, over 100 year old series of houses that is now being fully replaced by something contemporary. And I find it, look, without a shred of a doubt, something's going to be built here. So the fact that there's no 1905 house on that lot is beyond the powers of this board. But I do think that if this were coming before us on any other empty lot that had no previous structure on that, particularly not a historic structure, I don't think this would be even a moment's notice of just moving it forward and approving it because it is truly a really, really lovely structure that you're proposing. That said, I think given the circumstances, we would be remiss to not fully explore and allow an iterative process with the neighborhood association to make sure that it does consider to the greatest extent possible a reference to the previous structure. you seem like profoundly lovely people, and I would love to just blanketly approve this, but I think that it would be remiss of me to do that, and I think it would be... From a long-term standpoint, and you are long-term owners of this neighborhood, you are invested in all the character that you've bought into, and I imagine you would hope that we would hold ourselves to that same standard if one of these other old properties were to be torn down and built lot line to lot line, which I'm not saying it's what you're doing. I mean, again, this is textbook what should be done in a historic district, but I do think that there needs to be a bit further dialogue.

Mr. Powers, are you with us?

I am, thank you. I concur with Lewis about that. I think that they definitely need to talk to the Neighborhood Association and I would ask them to put this on next month's agenda after they've reached out to them.

Mr. Tretenburne.

Have you commented yet? I haven't. No, I'm good on my comments, but I'd like to make a motion when you're done.

Anyone else have any comments?

I do. I do have a comment. I have experience when new construction has been approved, when architecturally, There has been no major resemblance in the lineage of properties on the street that share the lot or share the street with the project proposed. I have seen this. Also, should one applicant be pressured into resolving the nefarious activities or whatever happened to a street 10 years ago, 20 years ago in Aldo, responsibility is not going to be placed upon someone who has now purchased and done a tasteful job and they now have to redeem all that stuff that happened negatively to the street, which I am sensitive to, but should that be placed upon one applicant? Especially when I've seen past projects where buildings didn't mimic anything on the street. So that's my comment.

Did you have any? Nope. All right. I'd like to make a motion, if it's okay.

Go ahead.

I'd like to move that item number seven be approved with all recommendations included as provided by staff.

Is there a second?

Yes, I second that.

Motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? If not, we have a roll call, please.

Yes. Calling Member Jordan Trachtenberg. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member Najee Campbell. Yes. Thank you. Calling Vice Chair Luis Prieto-Imuñoz. No. Thank you. Calling Member Christopher Cauley. Yes. Thank you. Calling Member John Perez. No. Thank you. Calling Member Robert Powers.

No.

Calling Member Hugh Ryan. No. Calling Chair William Hopper.

Yes.

Okay. So this is four and four. That's correct. There's another motion.

The motion fails to pass because there's no majority.

Can I make an amendment to the motion?

Yes. You can also substitute. You can do a new substitute or an alternative motion.

I'd like to add into the motion an additional condition that the applicant review with the homeowners association along with staff to come to a resolution on... on feeling the, I don't know the right way to put it, but feeling as though that they were incorporated into the process.

I want to remember to advise the board or remember that you cannot subject your approval, their approval, to what the neighborhood association wants.