Historic and Environmental Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

It's out of the game. Get your certification and keep working in the city of Miami. It's easy and free.

Thank you.

On average, 800 pedestrians and bicyclists are fatally injured on Florida roadways every year. Speed was a factor in approximately 30% of these fatalities. We all need to share the road responsibly. Drivers, pay attention to traffic signs and speed limits, especially in high traffic areas. Slow down and obey the signs so we don't need to use this one. Don't let one preventable act ruin countless other memories. Alert today, alive tomorrow.

Prepare for the hurricane season. Find everything you need to know to stay safe on our website. Don't wait any longer. Start preparing today.

Attention all city licensed landscapers. Help keep Miami safe and dry. Please keep drains clear of vegetative cuttings. Blocked drains can cause flooding in our neighborhoods. Together we can protect our city.

The Move Over Law was originally enacted to protect first responders and service workers that were providing critical services on our roadways. Anytime there was a critical service being provided, the law stated that motorists had to move over a lane to provide those workers with more space to do their job safely. Or if you're not able to move over a lane, you have to reduce your speed to 20 miles an hour under the posted speed limit. And again, the purpose of the law was to really just protect the people that are out there protecting you and providing these critical services. At the end of the day, we all want to get home safely. We really just want people to know the law is in place and to really abide by it for all of our safety. We have these move over tear sheets where we hand them to drivers that states all the information about the law. It doesn't mean it's a guaranteed ticket. We try to take sometimes an educational approach because at the end, again, we want everybody just to really understand the law and understand the importance of it.

There's only one thing that will save somebody's life, and that is Naloxone nasal spray. Get 911 on the phone. Get the emergency responses.

They're on their way.

I was a restaurateur in Panama. I had a very successful launch of a restaurant called Salvaje and ended up selling it. And in the interim, this really famous cheesemonger contacted me and he told me to open up a cheese shop. We initially started just doing the cheeses. We ended up adding the sandwiches. Now we have two locations currently, and we're opening up another two by end of the year. I've always fell in love with the tapas bar. You come in for a glass of wine or a beer, and you end up having a conversation with the person next to you, and it's super cool. And then that's when the magic happens by itself. What makes us different is the cheese. We're a cheese shop of the world. So when I created the sandwich concept, I knew I needed to be as authentic as possible. So we work with four different bakeries, and they all make different types of bread for our sandwiches. So we got the Frenchman sandwich called jambon bourree. which is French baguette. They put butter on top of it, French-style ham, Dijon mustard, cornichon, and this is a sandwich that you find in every single corner in France. So we have the Spaniard sandwich, sandwich with the manchego and the jamon. We have our own version of the pastrami sandwich. We have an amazing grilled cheese that we do as well. So we really focus on sandwich of the world. Chevre means goat cheese in French. We're a cheese shop, and I have a thing for goats. Chevre, the goat, the greatest of all time. So it kind of went through that whole phase. I was a very successful restaurateur outside of Miami, and I was always intrigued to come back. And I saw an opportunity. Miami has been kind of transitioning, I'd say, the last four to five years. People that were really out there, and they weren't really doing what we were doing.

So we saw an opportunity to come and showcase what we wanted to do, and it took off.

Feliz mes de la herencia hispana. Yo nací en Matanzas, Cuba. Mis padres me sacaron de Cuba, a mí y a mi hermano, durante 1970. Vinimos aquí a este país por los vuelos de la libertad. Estoy muy orgulloso de este país, que nos acogieron y nos dieron la bienvenida. Soy quien soy hoy en día por una combinación de mis padres que son cubanos. Me enseñaron la cultura cubana, hispana. Creo que hemos estado blessed de estar en este país, hablar los dos idiomas, tener la cultura de nosotros. Y claro que mis padres nunca me dejaron olvidar de dónde veníamos.

We are here today in Wynwood at Northeastern University, a partnership with Wynwood Chamber of Commerce. We're having a job fair today and a panel discussion with businesses and we are looking forward to people getting hired. Hopefully we'll continue this partnership and many more events like this to come.

It feels great. This is an amazing moment for the University, Northeastern University. It's their first job fair and leadership summit and I'm glad that they let the City of Miami Department of Human Services host it. We were able to work with the Wynwood Chamber to be able to ensure that this event will be very successful for their students and the surrounding community.

This is fantastic. I'm very excited what's going on here in Wynwood. There's an unbelievable opportunity for everybody, and there's a lot of enthusiasm, a lot of energy, and this is an example. Today's been a job fair here in the Wynwood area.

groundbreaking for the Little Havana Pedestrian Priority Zone project. We're targeting two areas. We're targeting this area in the Riverside Elementary. The focus on the project is to improve safety, pedestrian access to the schools and for the neighborhood. Access for those that are disabled is fundamental. We're going to be adding a lot more tree canopy so that folks are comfortable and we're also going to be improving our stormwater infrastructure so when it rains we can get rid of that water and again people are able to both drive and move through here. That is a priority, right? The pedestrian party zone and safety, getting these areas improved for these neighborhoods.

It's a project that we came up with several years ago when we received a report from the Department of Transportation that the worst area of all of Miami-Dade County for pedestrian accidents was here in Little Havana. And we came up with the concept of doing a pedestrian safety zone where we're improving the crossings in all the key areas of where there are schools where it's going to make it safer for our kid or our elderly, indeed for all of our residents, to be able to cross sidewalk in a much safer atmosphere.

This was one of the first projects Commissioner Rosado tasked our department with. It was basically to improve the parking and access conditions for the public in general and more specifically for parents and students for the school. So the project included new ADA compliant sidewalks, on a linear field of sidewalk and curb and water. Some drainage improvements to address previous stormwater issues. and about 200 linear feet of parking spaces, all to provide a safe and dry way for students and parents to reach the school.

We're so excited to be here today. This is Principal Piloto. We're here at Flagler Elementary and this is a project that my team and I and Public Works were able to start after I took office. We came to visit the elementary school and we saw that the front of the school could use a little bit of additional love from the city and so we went ahead and rather than having a muddy entrance here we went ahead and we we paid it we installed trees we installed grass and we installed some additional trees at the neighbors homes across the street here and it really helps to beautify the street and the neighborhood and we're so excited to have been able to partner with principal piloto thank you for all you do knowing thank you so much for assisting us in this project it has helped us a lot it's controlled our traffic it's made it safer for our students as they walk to school

We are here at the Little Haiti Cultural Arts Center welcoming the HUD Secretary, Ms. Cleveland Leggett, to take a tour of what's happening here in Little Haiti and the innovation that's happening. And I'm looking forward to creating additional community benefits here in Little Haiti.

I have been very impressed with the presentation. It's been a showing of innovation, showing that basically if we work together, if we provide innovation, we can get the job done. We can do and accomplish goals.

Since 2018, there's been over $4 billion worth of development in Opportunity Zones. And so one of the things with the visit from the regional administrator from HUD is that we wanted to let her know about transformative projects that are happening here in District 5 under the leadership of Chairwoman King.

What we're doing here this afternoon is acknowledging the project UNI and UNIDOS, which between both have delivered 650 affordable and workforce housing units right here in the urban core of Miami. We value our partnership with Denise Cleveland Leggett, who is the District 4 Administrator for HUD, and we value their ability to leverage our assets and be able to deliver in this community this type of product, which is innovative and provides opportunity and affordability in Miami.

Thank you.

Order the October meeting of the Historic Environmental Preservation Board and ask everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Please remain standing to be sworn in by staff.

All those who intend to testify on any matters, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. You may be seated.

I would ask our attorney to please give us a note concerning lobbying.

Good afternoon. Any person who is a lobbyist pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 6 of the City Code must register with the city clerk and comply with related city requirements for lobbyists before appearing before the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. A person may not lobby a city official, board member, or staff member until registering. A copy of the code section about lobbyists is available in the city clerk's office and online at muticode.com. Chair, I'm also going to go through some... other instructions and public comment options. Okay. The agenda for this meeting and the materials for the items on the agenda were published and made available to the board in advance of the meeting. The materials are also available online at miamigov.com. Please silence all cell phones and other noise-making devices. Any person with a disability requiring assistance, auxiliary aids, or services for this meeting may notify the hearing board's liaison. Any person may be heard by the board through the chair and pursuant to the published notice for not more than two minutes on any proposition before the board unless modified by the chair. When addressing the board, the member of the public must first state their name, address, and what item will be spoken about. When the board takes action or votes on any proposition, it shall do so by a roll call vote to be recorded and included in the record. Please note, board members may have generally been briefed by city staff on items on today's agenda. This meeting can be viewed live on Miami TV at miamigov.com slash TV and Comcast Channel 77 within the city of Miami. In addition to public comment here at City Hall, the public may submit comments via the city's online comment form. The comments submitted through the comment form, if any, have been distributed to the board members and the city administration so that the board can consider them prior to taking any action. Additionally, the online comment form will remain open during the meeting until closed by the chairperson. All comments received will be included in the public record. These public comment options established for this meeting comply with Section 286.0114 of the Florida Statutes. The city published an agenda as well as included in the notice to the public the items and topics that will be discussed at this meeting. Additionally, the public has been given the opportunity to provide public comment during and within reasonable proximity and time before the meeting. Board members, are you comfortable with all these notice and rules of procedure?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any requests for absence waivers?

Yes. Yes. Member Julie O'Dell?

That was Judy O'Dell as requested in the absence of labor.

Move to approve.

Is there a second? Thank you. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Can we have a roll call, please?

Dr. William Harper?

Here.

Mr. Robert Powers?

And your microphone isn't on.

Mr. Robert Powers? Mr. Christopher Colley?

Here.

Mr. Najeeb Campbell? Mr. Luis Frito y Munoz? Here. Mr. Hugh Ryan?

Here.

Mr. Jordan Trachtenberg? Here. Mr. Elvis Fuentes? We have quorum.

Thank you very much. I'd like to ask the preservation officer to please introduce our new board member.

With pleasure. I'd like to introduce to the board and the members of the public Mr. Elvis Fuentes, our newest board member. Mr. Fuentes is the executive director of the Carl Gables Museum. He has a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Havana and his ABD with a focus in art history from Rutgers University. Prior to being at the Carl Gables Museum, he was graduate curatorial fellow at the Zimmerly Art Museum at Rutgers University and adjunct professor at City University of New York College of Technology. Welcome on board.

Welcome. Let the record show that Mr. Powers is present. Does everyone have a chance to read the minutes of May 2025? Move to approve the minutes. Is there a second? Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. And we're on to monthly updates.

So my first monthly update.

I'm sorry. Are there any changes to the agenda first?

So there's one change that we would like to request the agenda in the discussion items. Director Frey is here regarding the Miami Marine Stadium. He does have another obligation this evening. We were hoping that we could move the discussion item up to the beginning of the agenda and let him present to the board.

Is there any objection? So ordered.

So monthly updates, my first one was introducing our new board member. I have no update at this time on the Grove Theater. We continue our ongoing work drafting some new district guidelines within the division. And we are working on a date for an additional meeting in January. Tuesdays are proving a little problematic. So we may reach out to the board members and see what your availability is and determine what availability there is with the chambers. That is my update for the month.

Okay. We'll move to the first discussion item that is out of order.

I'm sorry. So it's discussion item two is the Miami Marine Stadium update. I also want to remind everyone that discussion items are intended to be discussions between board members and staff and are not intended for public discourse or public comment.

Yes.

Mr. Chair, board members, Andrew Frey, city's head of real estate, here to give you, I guess, a brief update and maybe answer any questions you have on the Current status of the Marine Stadium. As you know, we issued an RFP for an operating partner on the Marine Stadium. That RFP went out, I think, in January. And then there was about, I think about four months, three or four months for people to submit proposals. And then there was... a review within the procurement department to make sure that the proposals received met all of the minimum requirements of the RFP. And then the proposals were handed off to an evaluation committee, which was made up of all independent individuals. No internal city folks. That's what I mean by that. And the evaluation committee recommended one of the two proposals, which was Oak View. The process after that, after evaluation committee per procurement rules, is that at that point, then the city manager leads negotiations with the first rank proposer until such time as there's a term sheet that manager's comfortable recommending to the city commission. The manager then made that recommendation to the commission with accompanying ballot language. Obviously, this is being waterfront property. Any long-term, any sale, lease, or long-term management agreement would have to go to the voters. And at that point, once the manager makes the recommendation, the cone of silence became lifted at that point. So the commission's consideration of the manager's recommendation and the ballot language was scheduled for a commission meeting, I believe, at the end of August. That meeting did not happen because of a lack of quorum. And so from that point, I think the focus has been on budget season and other items, so we haven't figured out when exactly the commission will take up that recommendation again. That is where we are currently at. And so if there's any questions, if the commission takes up the item, they would vote on whether to, yes, accept the manager's recommendation and approve the ballot language to go on the next ballot, which potentially be next November, or if there happens to be a special election in the meantime, it could go on that as well. The commission could also decline the manager's recommendation, discard the whole process, direct the manager to negotiate with the second place or the other group, So that will be up to the will of the Commission as policymakers to determine what they want to do. So, any questions?

Any questions from the board? I have a question. Yes, Mr. Chair.

So just suffice it to say, based on the fact that it didn't make this ballot, then at the very, unless there's a special election, nothing's going to be substantively happening with this project until next November, when it would be able to go to before the electorate?

Yes.

November 26th.

November 26th, yeah, unless there's... You know, fingers crossed, maybe, that there could be a special election or something else. I doubt, you know, that it's worth incurring the cost of calling a special election just for this item. But if there happens to be something, you know, driving a special election for some other reason, then we could piggyback on that. So, yes.

This board on several occasions has viewed and I believe in one instance voted on various plans for Marine Stadium. I don't know how familiar you are with the history of those approvals. It's a blur for me, so I can't really remember exactly what it was that we... Were you here for that, Ken? Or was that before your time?

So I was here for the ramps.

Yeah, this was prior to the ramps. Yeah, so I was not here for anything. Richard Heisenbottle, I think, designed it. He gave a whole presentation. It must have been 2019 or 2020. I don't remember. Does any of that factor into this selection process? Is that a plan that's independent of what's being currently considered? Or is there an expectation that those things will marry?

Yeah, I'm aware of that. renovation plans that have been worked on and the city's been paying for for many years. I think that part of the reason driving the RFP process was that we're not experts in world-class venue management. And so we wanted to have an operating partner by our side who's out there in the market operating world-class venues on a daily basis and understands where the market's at. in terms of what promoters are looking for, what artists are looking for, what audiences are looking for, what drives revenue, what's going to put us in the best position to be able to repay the bonds. There's going to be a lot of debt service on this renovation, so we didn't want to put the taxpayers' money at risk without feeling like we were in the best position to be able to repay the debt, basically. That's what's sort of driving this search for the right operating partner. Now, with that partner hopefully approved by the commission as well as the voters, then we would together build a joint business model, hopefully very quickly. And make sure that either the plans that have already been worked on and paid for meet the market. you know, meet what artists are looking for, what promoters are looking for, what producers are looking for, what audiences are looking for, what puts us in the best position to repay, you know, the significant commitment of public dollars that will have to be made for this, or are there changes Uh, that are going to need to be made, uh, to those plans. Um, maybe for increased back of house, uh, dressing rooms, green room, loading dock. Additional transformer vault, maybe more front of house requirements, um, such as. Uh, premium food and beverage, which I think is a big part of. Venue revenue these days. VIP seating. How many seats is this ultimately going to have? Are there going to be fewer, larger, more accommodating seats? Or are we going to pack in sort of the small historic seats or some smaller seats? A mix of the two. What's the what's the final capacity going to be? So we want to we want to have the we want to have a partner by our side who can help us make those calls about if and how to to modify the drawings to, like I said, put us in the best position to activate. to restore the facility, to activate the facility, and to repay the obligations for doing so. And of course, once those changes or revisions are made, then the plans would go through the normal historic preservation process for design approval or building permit approval, and then also sign off once the renovations are done. Obviously, that's part of the sign-offs. is historic preservation staff touring, inspecting the work, making sure it's all done. So all of the historic preservation protocols will be followed. We want to make sure that we're bringing the right plans before you that are going to restore the historic building, but also meet the market. Understood. Thank you. No further questions from me.

Yes, Mr. Powers.

I just wanted to know, because I was with Mr. Regalado about two weeks ago, and this came up as a topic of conversation. Can you speak into your mic? Am I not speaking loud enough? I don't think the mic is on.

Get a little closer.

All right, sorry. I don't get that complaint too often. I was sitting with him. I'm working on another program with him about property taxes and that kind of a thing. nonetheless the conversation came up about the 40 million dollars that was set aside from the city to specifically go into the renovations of that project and uh are those funds still available or have they evaporated i'm not sure i'm not sure what those i believe at one point in time the city you know the

When you're thinking about doing a capital project that you, as a city, think might involve some bond financing, you can do what's called an intent resolution and say, hey, we think at some point we're going to pay for this project with bonds, we haven't issued the bonds yet. But because we're thinking about it, if we vote on this intent resolution, the things that we start spending our money on now, if we issue bonds within a certain time period, we can use some of that money to repay what we're spending now. So that's sort of this proactive financing resolution. I believe a notice or an intent resolution was passed by the city commission for a certain amount of money. I don't think anyone really at that time knew what it would or wouldn't cost, but they just basically said, let's pass this resolution so that we can start spending money and then reimburse ourselves. But there's an expiration date on those intent resolutions. But I think this was more than intent. I think the money had been put aside. I don't know anything about that. All right. Very good. Thank you.

I just wanted to put it on the record that at one point in time, there was $40 million set aside for some of that work on that property. And what happened to the... Didn't the last guy who... Do something get in trouble with the state or something? He couldn't continue on with the bid? I have no idea what you're referring to. Thank you.

Any other questions? I believe at one point I had asked for what the elevation, both of the parking lot and the floor level of the Marine Stadium was, and I don't know that I ever got an answer to that.

Yeah. Yeah. I have no idea.

Thank you very much. Any other questions? Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Now we'll move into the public hearing part of the agenda. Staff will announce each item as it appears on the agenda. The applicant will come forward, give your name and address for the record. Then we will have the staff report, after which the applicant may make additional comments concerning the application. When they have finished their presentation, we will open it up to the public for comments, and I would ask you to keep your comments to two minutes or less. If everyone has had an opportunity to speak, we will close the public hearing and limit discussion to the board, staff, and anyone to whom the board may direct a question. And I believe we're ready for item number one. Oh, and at the end of that, we'll have a vote to say whether that will be passed or not. Now we're ready for item number one.

Mr. Chair, can I please close online public comment?

Yes.

Item number one.

A resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2 parenthesis B parenthesis 4 of the City Code of Ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness SCOA for a property located within the Spring Garden Historic District to permit partial demolition of a contributing structure, the construction of a two-story addition and site improvements at a property located approximately at 834 Northwest 9th Avenue, Miami, Florida, 33136, further incorporating the attached analysis in the staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Is the applicant present? No, they're not.

It would seem that they're not, yeah. Do we have a request for continuance from them?

Sorry, could you repeat that? Do we have a request for continuance from them?

They were going to, we had spoke that they were going to come down here and request a further deferral because they had to do a complete redesign on the project. We had recommended denial the first time this came around and we'd be requesting it again. It seems that They don't have another architect for this yet, and so they wanted more time. Shall we move this to the end of the agenda?

Sure.

Okay.

Move it. Any objection from the board? We'll move this to the end of the public hearing agenda.

Okay.

We'll move on to item number two. So moved.

A resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to Section 23-6.2, parentheses B, parentheses 4 of the City Code of Ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit demolition of a contributing structure and new construction of two structures on a property located approximately at 888 Northeast 71st Street, Miami, Florida 33138 within the Bayside Historic District, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

And is the applicant present? I would say so.

Nicole, did you get one?

Good morning. Well, good afternoon.

So as the board may remember, this item was before the board last month. It was deferred with recommendations from the board. I don't believe that an updated staff analysis was included in your packet. However, there was... a memo identifying those items that had been addressed, that the board and staff had recommended, and a couple of items that did not get addressed in their plan. So I'll just run through fairly quickly to remind the board.

Wait, before you do that, I would like to ask the applicant to give your name and address for the record first.

Yes, my name is Sergio Rodriguez, 10830 Southwest, 95th Street, Miami, Florida, 33176. Thank you. Now we'll have the staff report.

So again, this is a request for a special certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of a contributing building and the construction of two new structures on a lot in the Bayside Historic District. As you can see, the location of the property... So the existing structure has had some alterations and additions to it over the years. The original open carport has been enclosed. The original jalousied screen porch has been enclosed, changing the overall volume of the structure. There have also been changes which have changed the form and visual appearance of the structure as well. As you recall the applicant is proposing construction of 2 new structures on that property it is. And at the request of the board there were several items that. The applicant sought to address. Primarily one being the height of the structures in relation to the adjacent properties. So they did manage to introduce terracing at the front of the property. They incorporated a water course into each property. They removed the transom windows from one of the structures. They reduced the height of the roofs. They changed a garage into a carport on lot 39. They widened the north elevation stairs on lot 38. They changed the stucco color, removed the fencing along the front of the property. There are still transom windows on lot 38. And the ornamentation detail in the gable in lot 39 appears to have been removed in their current plans. So they've managed to put two small terraces into the front of the property, reducing the visual aspect of the new structures. So as is per our directive, we recommend denial of the request for demolition of a contributing resource. However, in recognition of the Board's agency, should you agree to allow the SCOA for the demolition, we do recommend approval of the two new structures with the following conditions. The site shall be developed in accordance with the plans as prepared. and submit as part of the application as revised. At the time of permitting and or sub-permitting, manufacturer's brochures, color photographs of proposed design elements and et cetera, including but not limited to windows, doors, railings, roof, and et cetera, shall be submitted for approval. The resolution shall be included in the master permit set. All windows shall be clear and or low E. Opaque tinted and or colored glass is not allowed. The new mountains must be applied raised profile with the contour shape. The design details of the rectangular accent on the front gable of lot 39 building should be submitted for approval by HEP staff. Design shall be appropriate to the historic district. The applicant shall comply with its preliminary zoning review and HEP review, all applicable requirements of the Miami 21 Code and Chapter 17 Code. I'm sorry, Miami 21 Code and Chapter 17, Chapter 23, the City of Miami Code of Ordinances. And the applicant shall apply with the requirements of all departments and agencies as part of the City of Miami permit submittal process.

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

I believe that everything on there is pretty well packed. We did provide a copy to you guys. We're here to answer any further questions. I do believe that the project has, with these small changes, make it even more part of the It does represent even further what's currently there. I would like to add there are other neighbors that are here today supporting this project being fulfilled. And we're here too to help in any other way.

Before we move on, did you say your name and address?

Say it again?

Did you say your name and address?

Yes, I did.

Okay, I missed it. Thank you.

I'm Javier Cuevas from Cuevas Architecture, 9611 Southwest, 24th place, in Florida 33186. And one of the things I did wanted to add is I think most of the conditions our staff did recommend it, and you, the boards, made the project better. As an architect, I think the turns in towards the property did minimize the scale of the new homes compared to the existing homes. And I think removing the garage and making it into a carport did open up a lot of the facade that we had before, and reducing the height. Overall height and the roof pitch did help a lot with the project. So we did see a big change, even though there were small conditions.

Yeah. Is that it? Yes. Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Please come forward, give your name and address for the record, and limit your comments to two minutes or less.

Hi, everyone. My name is Wendy Mendoza, and I live at 815 Northeast 70th Street. This is my neighborhood. I've been there 25 years. I'm on the backside of them, three houses down. We desperately want this house to be demolished. I walked through there yesterday. getting some signatures from my neighbor for infrastructure in the neighborhood, and the whiff of mold is just not to be believed. That is not okay. Just walking by. I ask all of you to just walk by. It's just a whiff of mold. So the first thing is we wanted to have demolished. In my street on 71st, they took a lot. That was, I think, maybe like 15,000 square feet. They put... two brand new homes, two stories in this case on like 5,200 square feet each. And at first everybody was like, oh my gosh, oh my gosh, this is just gonna look out of scale. It doesn't, it's nice. The first family has already moved in. This is one story. So we get to have two families move into the neighborhood and we need housing, all kinds of housing in Miami. And I look forward a year and a half from now having two new families in that neighborhood. So I urge you please to approve this. Let's knock this eyesore down that is constantly flooded because the earth is just too wet there. I don't know. I don't know how you fix that. So thanks.

Thank you. Yes, ma'am.

Hello, my name is Manjuri Faiz, and I live at 880 Northeast 71st Street. My property is adjacent to this property. I am to the west of it. I've been living there since 2019, and since I've been there, the things that I have seen at that property are not just an eyesore, it's a nuisance and a safety concern. Among the things that I have seen at night, people parking there having sex, occasional people parking there and having lunch or dinner and then dropping their bags on the property. And on one occasion, I saw a woman park her truck there, get out of the car and defecate in the property. In addition to that, there was a gentleman who went in there and stole dirt. I could see everything because my bedrooms are, you know, they face that side. And I open all my windows. I like a lot of light. And then on another occasion, there was a gentleman, a homeless person, that attempted to live in the property. There was another one last occasion where there was a gentleman that crossed the property and went into the back of my house and walked all the way in to try to open the door while I was in there. It's a safety concern. I've been waiting for this place to get knocked down for a very long time, and I urge you to please, please just approve it. My property, I just saw these plans. I hadn't seen them before. My house looks a lot like these homes. And I'm practically next door. My lot, I think, is also either 50 feet wide or 60. It's one of the smaller ones. But these properties would definitely look really nice in the neighborhood. And that's pretty much all I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

Good evening, my name is William Arthur. I am a resident of Bayside, and I am the president of Bayside Residence Association, which is the association that represents residents from Northeast 61st Street to Northeast 72nd Street, east of Biscayne to the bay.

And your personal address?

680 Northeast 64th Street. Apartment APH3, by the way. While I agree with my neighbors that this property has become an eyesore, but I'm urging you all to think, how did this property become an eyesore? Why did it become an eyesore? Who has owned this property this entire time to allow it to become dilapidated and an eyesore to the point where all the neighbors really do want it torn down? But is that the right thing for this body to be recommending? This body is, I thought, supposed to preserve historic homes. So I ask Ken, How can there be any kind of conditions on your analysis for denial to tear this property down when, at the end of the day, this was intentional neglect? This did not happen overnight. This property was owned by these owners for years. They let it get this way. There has been vagrants, like my neighbors have said. There has been businesses in there that have been illegal. There has been everything under the sun. And who is to blame for this? It's the owner. Well, he presents these gorgeous plans, and I think they're nice. They're really nice plans, but that is not what we're here to vote on or to talk about. We're to talk about this is a contributing structure in our neighborhood, a contributing structure, albeit a very, like, dilapidated one because of these people. That's two minutes.

I'd like to hear more, please.

That's through the chair.

I'd like to hear more. I heard you. Please continue.

Yeah. So what I would like to ask the esteemed colleagues of this board is to consider the fact that this was done by intentional neglect and that there's a lot of remedies. This individual was told many times, never got permission from our board, and was told many times by even this board that there's a lot of different ways that you could pair this. It's a double lot. You could turn the house sideways. You could add on to that. You could build your own thing on the other side. But this is a contributing structure. That if you allow this to happen, what message does that send to other owners who buy properties in historic districts? And what does that say about setting precedence for this to happen in other historic neighbors like Bayside? Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Could I add to? Yes, I'll give you some time for rebuttal at the end. Yes, ma'am.

Hello, thank you for making the time and the effort to participate in this. My name is Mariela Lopez-Albert. My address is 661 Northeast 68th Street. I'm the president of Elmira Historic Northeast 68th Street, which is the first street on the Platteford Bayside. My house is 111 years old. I came in in 1999. I could have demolished her, I could have neglected her, but I didn't. I chose to preserve her and to bring her back to life so that this street could be what it is, historical Elmira. What I am seeing happening today in our historic neighborhood is intentional neglect, unfortunately. When I came in, there used to be people that used to patrol and used to give fines to the people that were letting it neglect. And if they didn't do something about it in a certain amount of time, they would get a fine. The second thing that I want to say is, If you're going to call a district or a neighborhood historic, then you have to preserve it historic. Now in my time, back in 1999, if you demolished a house and it was a conforming structure, you had to go to the microfilm and you had to find that conforming structure and you had to build it back. as similar as it was to the original historic home. What I'm seeing happening in my street, what I'm seeing happening all over Bayside and other places as well, is that the historic board is not a street that it used to be when I came in, and again, my house is 111 years old and has a basement, one of the very few in the United States, is that they're not preserving, and they're not saying, fine, demolish it. It's gone too far. But it was conforming, and we want to see it to be the original conforming structure so that we have a sense that when we go through those streets, we say, hey, that's a historic home. That was a historic home. And you try to build it back up to what it was. On this street, on 71st Street, the two houses that they built, they look... exactly the same, they have no personality, they have nothing in difference, it's just a modern structure which Sarah Sharp came here in 2023 and begged the headboard not to allow that to happen. So I'm asking you, just remember, you don't live in a zip code, you live in a planet, preserve it, share it, and when you think of historic, think of the word historic and what that means, thank you. And don't allow this, please. Or at least have it conform to what it was originally.

Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this item who has not spoken before? Okay, I'll give you some time for a rebuttal.

I just want to, because I don't recall them being here last time, I do want to make sure that they are aware that we came into ownership of this property in 2019. But this property has been abandoned and been neglected by its previous owner, the owner who, if I'm not mistaken, was the first or second owner to this property in 2000. This property was there like that while they were there as well for 19 years abandoned before it even came into my ownership. I received this property in the condition that it is today. And my intention since that day through the three times that I've been here in front of this board has been to restore that property. And the things that have shown up have not allowed me to do so. If it wasn't for the many structural damages that this property has, the ability of not supporting another column on top of it, having to do anything with it, having to be knocked down and essentially rebuilt, I would have not been here today. asking approval for this project. I appreciate your time and I understand how difficult it is, but we have done the best to our ability to be able to make that property look and show with modern, obvious, modern construction methods and ones that will outlast how long that property exists today. This property, the way that it's being built and it's being proposed, will not only last 50, 60 years. This property will be built to be able to then be able to show what a real historic property is and the things that it should incorporate, and it will outlast, I believe, everybody in this room. Thank you.

Thank you. And I'll close the public hearing and open up to the board for questions or comments.

I got a quick question. In the six years you've owned it, have you had any violations?

Oh, I've had violations.

Oh, no, no, I understand, but have you answered the violations?

Oh, I've taken care of those violations as well. Unfortunately... These items cannot be resolved unless I obtain a building permit. So most of these things... Well, hold on.

I mean, I know what we're talking about here, so you don't have to educate completely. A lot of this stuff being unsecured, you don't need a permit for that. For boarding things up, for keeping people from going in, for putting a fence up, for putting all these other things... We cannot put a fence up unless this board approves it.

I've already tried to do it two times.

a security fence.

Have you had... No fence.

I'm not disputing what you're saying. Based on what we're talking about and how long you've owned it, and it's been a problem, security, safety, cleanliness, whatever, mold, all this other stuff. You know, there are ways. I own properties. I understand how this stuff goes. My house is 111 years old, too, wherever she is. So, you know, I'm just asking because it sounds like one version and another version. And if you just bought it and let it sit there and then deal with it, you should have fines up to here based on what you haven't done.

The only reason why I'm not there where you're stating is because I've diligently worked on this nonstop. I received the violation... I have the dates. I could bring them up if necessary. I received the violation the next day. I was calling the inspector up.

The other point of me saying this was that if people are complaining about how it's been so bad for so long, they should be calling if it's a real problem. So if they have been calling, then that answers my question.

The inspectors are aware. of everything that has been done to this property. We've called 911. We've called everything we possibly can. And trust me, if I am not there with $300,000, $400,000 worth of violations, it's because the relationship I have built with the network neighborhood the relationship that I've built with the city of Miami over the many years, the personal relationship I've built with the code compliance officer that has been out God knows how many times to issue me violations, and he knows, he's aware of the condition inside the property. The property inside is completely gutted. To get a building permit, I have to come in front of this board to do anything. To get a roofing permit, I have to do the same thing. I've tried to do the fence so many times because I was there three days ago. I'm literally in my pickup truck in front of the house. People just walk right through the middle. God forbid that when the wall, the section of the wall fell, there was somebody there, I would be liable for it.

I can't get insurance. I hear you.

I want you guys to understand my frustration because as much as I've wanted to do things with this property, this property is a burden on me, right? This property has been burning a hole in my pocket since day one. I tried in 2019 to get a permit for this. There is PZs open since 2019, in 2024, this one now, and I have been in the work since I've owned this property since day one to be able to restore it. If it wasn't for the many hiccups that I've had throughout the entire process, denial of this board for the second one, and for the first one that I did get approval, if it wasn't for the issues that we found during that process with flooding, because I'm very sorry, and I don't mean to offend the person that spoke. But when I got an insurance quote, being three, not even three blocks, talking about there's three neighbors to my side, I have the access road, the park, and the water. Nobody's going to insure this property, even if I would have built it according to that. And if they weren't insured, it would have to be a private insurance agency, and they would charge me just in flood insurance $20,000. That's not to neglect also that the other $20,000 that I have to pay, just the land being there. That doesn't include the cost that I am going to have to accrue by building the property, then owning it, and then being able to maintain it.

I understand because I deal with it myself. Up in Shorecrest, I've got Two buildings on one property. The flood insurance is through the roof. One of them is an upstairs garage apartment, and they hit me up for $2,000 for that one a year, 14 feet off the ground. So I understand what you're saying. This is burning a hole in your pocket. So six years of dealing with this, I see your frustration, and I'm with you. So I understand that. Other questions?

Go ahead.

I have some.

So when you were here the last time, the thing that I have an issue with is this, is that you bought the property to move into. That's what you said. And you never moved in.

That's true.

You never moved in. And the other thing is that this board's job is to protect the house, not make you money. And not be concerned about insurance or any of that other stuff. That's not our concern. And it shouldn't even come into the equation. You showed up here saying that that was something that you bought in 2019 to move into. You never moved into it.

Never been able to.

You never moved into it. Yes, there are ways to move into it. You just never bothered to move into it. You never bothered to move into it or do what you needed to do, and you never homesteaded the property. Did you homestead it? Sir, then you shouldn't have bought it. Then you shouldn't have bought it, and your other remedy is to put it up for sale and sell it to somebody. I should have done that in 2020. Well, you should do it now.

I'm just saying. Wait, hold on. That's getting into financial business, too. That's none of your business.

But what do you think this is?

Well, I know, but you're answering that with that.

He's asking us to step over. The very thing that we're supposed to protect because of financial constraints, that is not our concern on this board.

Our board is to protect the house. How can you protect the property?

I already gave you a whole thing the last time you were here, and you never called me. I could have given you the name of the guy. You could have picked the house up, and what did I say to you? You can turn it. If you... To build the house, how many square feet is that house? This one? Yes. Each house is around 2,000 square feet. 2,000 square feet. Now multiply that by 300. That's how much it would cost to build that. That's $600,000. If you can afford to pull down $600,000, I don't feel sorry for you. I'm just saying. Because it would cost $600,000 to build 2,000 square feet of living space. And I already told you that for $200,000, you could pick that house up, put it up higher, and turn it the other way. And that this board might, because I don't think for these people, they have their own thinking, that you could sell the other lot. That was my thing. That was my remedy to your issue. Okay? And that's what you've chosen. You've chosen other things. You have brought us plans. So your intention was never to restore that house. or you would have brought plans to restore the home and build maybe 1,500 square feet more onto it, put a second story on it, whatever. I'm just saying. Okay, so there are all kinds of ways around this, and you have decided to do what you are deciding to do. And I don't buy it. Because I live in a historic district and I bought a historic home to live in a historic property. I didn't want to live in a new house. Okay? So you bought in a historic district in an area that's prone to flooding. Everybody knows that there isn't any... He lives in Morningside. There's two or three other people that live in historic areas that are prone to flooding. And that just goes with the program. And until FEMA and the city of Miami are willing to deal with a real live issue, because don't think that I don't feel for you. I do. But they haven't. They've chosen not to. And by the way, FEMA in Houston paid to have people's houses raised rather than to knock them down. Okay, because it was more financially expedient to do that than to build new houses. But Houston also allows people to build in a floodplain. So I still don't understand that either. But that's just because I've been there. So when you talk to this board and people like me who travel all over the world and see things that have been put back together all over the world, far more gone than what the house you're talking about because the walls are still standing and there's still a roof on it. It can be repaired and things can happen to it. You've chosen to do something different. If you had moved into the home and there had been an issue or whatever, that might land on us a little differently. But in my own neighborhood, I have three people who are actively trying to destroy and rip down perfectly good homes because they want to build a new modern house in a historic district. And it just defies... explanation. Because you know what? Go to Bellmead. They'll let you knock down anything in Bellmead. I'm just saying, you want to live along the water? Go to Bellmead. You can knock down until the end of time. You bought in a historic district, and I'm sorry, but from my perspective, and I'm going to fight everybody on this board who thinks otherwise, our job is to protect that house. That's my job. Thank you.

Other questions or comments?

Well, um, Bob, is it your stance that never shall any contributing structure ever be demolished? Is that your personal stance? And have you ever been here on the board when that has occurred?

Not that I'm aware of. But I'm not the one that is defending it. He is. No, no, I'm asking you. But I'm just saying, I wouldn't allow it, no, and I fought for other properties in my neighborhood. The word I use was ever. I don't know, sir. I couldn't answer that question off the top of my head.

Since you won't, since, you know, as your personal stance, you can't use the word ever, that means there are times when you have to be flexible with this situation, yes or no.

I already gave him a flexible.

No, I'm asking you, though.

I did. I made a flexible arrangement. The last time we had this conversation about this property, there's ways for him to deal with that house and also to build a new home on the property as well. Or that he could have added to that house and raised it. So I don't understand what you're saying to me.

I was asking about your stance or whatever. You answered that. But you're also prescribing something to a property owner.

Our job. Okay. If they don't want to answer to this board, then they shouldn't buy in a historic district.

Well, you want them to answer to you. What? It seems as if what I'm saying is the recommendations you made the last time, right? They weren't the board's recommendations. They were your recommendations. So what were my recommendations? I don't understand what you just said. When to pick up the house, turn it.

Yeah, that was my recommendation.

Yes. Yes. So you're making a personal recommendation that is your, you know, your purview for the solution, right? Yeah. So that's why I asked, is it your stance that a contributing structure should never be demolished? No, it shouldn't. Never?

No.

I don't believe so.

No.

Okay.

I mean, I haven't been placed in that position, but I don't understand your query to me about that. I mean, our job is to protect historically designated properties. This is a property that's historically designated, has a roof on it, all four walls. And its only issue is that it floods. That's not the only issue.

I want to correct that.

Because all the tie beams, all the foundation, everything is cracked, and there's evidence in your documentation to show. I just want to clarify.

Okay, so this is what you have to know.

Well, hold on.

None of that evidence has been given to us. I presented it last time. Well, it's not been presented.

No, I did not provide you that because obviously we're in continuation.

It's in your agenda packet. It is in your agenda packet.

Additionally, if you guys don't mind me interrupting your conversation, in 2019, we went through the process of going in front of this board. We presented something to you guys, which was approved. And I have copies of it here if you guys would like to see it, just to remind this board of what it approved. I personally, and this is my personal opinion, if you see this project that was approved, and you see what we are presenting today, And if you believe this is, because this is ideally what we wanted to do in the beginning. We spent almost a year and a half on these plans. Everything here, I can show you in the back, I can tell you the way that it was laid out, where my bedroom was going to be, where my brother's bedroom was going to be, where my parents' bedroom was going to be, where my sister's bedroom was supposed to be. And that house, we were going to live in it in a year and a half. We set out the budget to do it. We set up everything that we had in our budget Possible and feasible way to doing it. We did it plans are there this board approved it. We were ready to rock and roll We didn't see the structural issues because we never went into a structural Engineer, we just we're gonna remodel what's there. We're gonna add to what's on the back We never went to touch base with an engineer of actually this getting done. How do we done it? That wouldn't have gotten approved We couldn't build on that. As soon as we presented to go and touch that structure, that structure was not going to carry what we proposed to do. My and what I would really want you guys to see is this project, to me, looking at what's being presented today is hideous. I personally cannot believe myself today putting my neighbors to see this in comparison to that. Again, my intention is to live in those houses that you're seeing there. My intention is not to sell it. I sell it one day in the future. I'm not saying no. But my dad wants the one that has access to see the water. I'm willing to take the one next door. He gets dibs. I don't. But I don't know. I understand that this board is here to protect, serve the community. My recommendation, trust me, is as much as I would have liked to do this back in 2019, I am here today. And the evidence and the stuff that I am presenting to you is not because I've wanted to be there. I have not been wanting to fight this for seven years.

Let me ask you a quick question.

Wait, Mr. Campbell had the floor and it was interrupted. Mr. Campbell, do you have additional questions for the applicant?

My point has been lost. I'll be back. Continue, Hugh.

I was just going to ask about the practicality of moving this. You can move anything, I know, whatever. But this is on slab or terrazzo?

I believe it's on a slab.

I'm looking at the front elevation and there's one step off the ground. You would have to dig. There's one and then there's a little one in there. You're basically a foot off the ground on a slab. That's a different story. I've looked at moving houses that are cross-based, wood frame, whatever. This is a different thing. But that's just my construction thought.

Can I ask one other question? Is this property right next to Shane Graber's home? I believe... No? No. I don't know the... Okay, so just so you know, I was called out to look at his home, which is three houses in from... from the bay. It's a mid-century modern. It sits very similar to your home. It's very similar in its thing. And I met out there with modern building movers to look at that house to raise it up. And that home is just under 3,000 square feet, and it was going to cost to have him bring that up. I think we were going to bring it up three feet. It was going to cost him about $200,000 to do that. So when I, just listen to me. So I'm not talking off the top of my head to just blow smoke up your ass and tell you that there's this new thing, okay? Because not only did I do it for that house, I then had to do it for another house in Davis Harbor, which I have a meeting with that person to pick up the house. So that is no longer because his insurance has gone up too, and it's because his house falls 10 inches under the flood, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, these made-up things that they do for flooding, okay? So I know, I'm telling you right now as I sit here with you, that I know what I'm talking about. And the house next door to Mr. Graber's home, which is even in a bigger mess than his, okay, because it had concrete I-beams that it sat on, with a Ketchum tile floor. And the Ketchum tile floor and the concrete I-beams that have the thing have started to literally just melt away because of the salt water that comes up and goes underneath the house and is eating away all that concrete I-beams that it sits on. The way to lift that house is to put I-beams through the windows and lift the house up like this and cut the whole foundation out from underneath it and do whatever and then build a new foundation underneath it. So I'm just telling you that I am not talking to you or to this board of which I do not know. I have met out there with them, I've gone over these things with them, I didn't bring them with me, maybe I should have brought them with me, the actual, what it was going to cost to do that, This is what we need to realize on this board. This is not something that's going to go away. It's gonna happen in Morningside, it's gonna happen in your neighborhood, more and more, because the water is coming, whether you want it to or not, and we just can't knock down houses because the water is coming. We need to lift them up. And either this, in other countries, The state would do that. In this one, we're left up to our own devices. So here we are, and you're asking, you and I are having this spar right now, and I'm just letting you know that there is a way to save that house, and there is a way to do something with it, and the more likely you are to save it, the more likely I am to vote for helping you along. That's all I'm saying to you. And to your point, yes, I do not agree that we should be just knocking down things to knock things down. I think every effort should be made to preserve our history in this city because more and more of it gets knocked down every day. And I think that we need to really reevaluate what we do. And I have three properties in my neighborhood that if I say yes to him, they're going to want me to say yes to them. That's all I can say.

Yes, but here on the board, we do things per case sometimes. Yes, you do. Yes, we do. I've been here where... The decisions have been made where let's hear, have you been to the neighbors? What do the neighbors think? Okay, well, henceforth.

Well, the president of the neighborhood association was here who said that they don't. There were three other neighbors. Through the chair.

Through the chair. Different association.

Through the chair.

Through the chair.

Yes, this is my point. Neighbours have come here from the neighbourhood also supporting the project. When you look at the house that's there, there's contributing houses that get brought into a sweeping designation and there are individual designations that people go out because they actually want to designate this individual structure. To me, when I look at the architectural design and the value of the home in question, it's not that really that quality of structure that we fight for usually here. And the neighbors have come and said, They like the project. It's going to improve the infrastructure and the environment around the neighborhood. The quality of the design, I think, is an improvement architecturally over the present product. When you put all these points together, as I've seen done many times here, where we put factors together not to have a blanket hard line law for any case, there's flexibility here. In this case, I see the flexibility to allow this man to develop the property.

Thank you. Mr. Campbell, I'm going to cut the session off now and recognize the director.

Yeah, I have a question.

Wait, wait.

So as we move forward, I want to make sure that everybody understands that each case is based on its individual merit. And so the conditions of every house that we look at, whether they're contributing or contributing, are going to be different. based on the time that it's had to deteriorate, the condition, the age of the home, the materials of the home, the elevation by block to block, and the type of construction. So those are all things that change from variation of demolition case to demolition case. So the first question that is in front of this board is, is this building okay to demolish? And then the second question is, if you believe that it's appropriate to demolish the structure, is the proposed new construction appropriate to replace the demolition or the previous structure? If you don't believe that the building should be demolished, that it can still be saved, then you should vote that way. If you think that it can be demolished, that it's past the point of saving as a contributing structure, then you can vote that way and move to your second question. But I think that there's a lot of opinions that are going into this, and I want to make sure that we have some decorum around those opinions and that we are answering the questions that are in front of us and staying within our purview. which is should this structure be demolished? And if so, is the infill design appropriate?

Right. Yes, Mr. Fuentes. Yes. Well, I have a question because I'm new. I reviewed the package last night, and I had a lot of questions, especially in terms of the intent or, I would say, attempt to, at some point, if it was discussed, to basically rebuild the house according to what it was. So even if it's a demolition, why we don't replicate the house, right, to maintain with the historic character of the neighborhood because it's a contributing structure. And if that was at all discussed or considered or anything like that or because what I'm seeing is, again, it's two houses instead of one. I love the design. I think they're very appropriate, and they're wonderful. But it's a contributing structure. And I understand that it was brought as a contributing structure in 2015, so it was four years prior to the purchase. And so I want to understand if there was at some point the interest attend or intend to save the house or build a similar structure, right, to replicate the one that we are discussing to demolish or not. I think demolish for me is like, is the, you know, last resort, right? Is really demolishing a structure is, that's it, it's gone. And in a historical neighborhood, I think it's important that we keep that into consideration, right? But we just have now an exhibition called Aguevo Museum, sorry, that's, you know, my job, of the bell tower of Seville. And everybody says, oh, wow, that's amazing. That's real history. It has 900 years. But it has 900 years because it was not knocked down when it was 50. And I think that's something that we have to take into account with every historical neighborhood and every historical contributory structure.

So I can tell you from my point of view as an architect, we did look at, obviously, as an architect, believe it or not, we do want to preserve these properties. As long as they have historical value within the neighborhood, this property was renovated and added to and enclosed and completely changed in 1959, I believe, or something like that. We also have to, the new flood elevation requires us to go five feet. This house, I think, measures eight feet. So once you lift this at that elevation, Does the house really, even if we reconstruct it back to how it was before 1959 after all the additions and changes, does it still become a contributing structure? It's gonna be very different. We're talking about we will need to raise almost more than half of the home in terms of higher proportion. Is it really going to look the same? And as an architect, I did look at the property, and compared to other properties in the area, I honestly do not see any contributed architectural aspects of it. from a construction standpoint, from an architecture standpoint. The water course is just only a facade. It's essentially, I would call it a little bit fake. It doesn't wrap around like we're providing here. We don't have this uh this home doesn't have porches you know we are providing this open and the porches that are throughout the neighborhood as well so they're set out of aspects that we're doing a new construction that i do believe is more contributing to the neighborhood than what success now even we were to raise it even if we were to make it how it was back in the days um i don't see how trying to visualize how it would look contributing to the neighborhood. I think it would be more of a Frankenstein in a way, trying to put everything together.

I understand your point, and I agree with you. We've done that many times on this board. There have been buildings that have been knocked down and built exactly how they were. Even like Ada Merritt School was done like that, and one on Biscayne Boulevard and MIMO on the boulevard. It's not going to be contributing because it's brand new. However, it's your opinion as an architect new to the neighborhood. The neighborhood and the investors, meaning the people who have lived there for 40, 30, 40, 20 years, whatever, they're investors as well, and they like what they're looking at. Now, as far as the alterations that have been done since the 50s, those get scraped off, those get taken off. And the original picture I'm looking at here, that's as close as can be, that's what's done. So it just hit me, if you're building two, if you're proposing building two there on the same spot, why not do one of them as a replica of the original? and then do the other one. That would sit better with me than knocking down a contributing structure, and as beautiful as they are, and with the artist's rendition and the woods behind it, it looks like Central Florida. And this is Miami. You can't redo the jealousy windows, but you'll do something similar to that. And with the carport, and that front porch looks like it's a jealousy window front porch with the front door going in. But something... I would think if you're building two, you've got a chance to replicate what's there.

And I think the way the house sits right now, it won't be in the setbacks. The only way would be to turn around, and then you're looking at a side facade with no windows.

How wide is the existing house, the original?

I would say it's almost... It's around 10 feet on each side.

So you're talking about... 60 feet or so, or maybe... And the lot right now is 100, and you're splitting into... There's two lots. It's 50-ish. But the building, as it is right now, splits the middle. Yeah. I mean, that comes up sometimes.

Yeah. And it's too wide to bring in to one lot.

Well, I mean, I'm just thinking even something similar, even something to fit within the setbacks.

So one of the things that you might not appreciate from looking at it, you know, just from a glance, if you go all the way towards the bottom or to the end of the sheets, we've taken components from the house itself and we've put them on. So we've included fox breaking. We've done, you know... as much as possible to make this project look like what was originally there. And I understand that, you know, in the sense...

I hear you, and we've had people, this element, that element, a little deco, a little this, whatever, it becomes like a smorgasbord. And I'm not saying that it's wrong, because I like what you drew, or what you're proposing, just, you know, and I understand the two lots split this, I don't think it's, you know, agree with Mr. Campbell, I don't think it's the most significant historic structure. However, it is a contributing structure. So it's not up to me. It's not really up to you. It is a contributing structure. I would, what our new colleague suggested, I think that's a better compromise or whatever is to build something close to this, even if it's within the setbacks, and then build one of the others, you know?

I mean, that's just my thought based on... May I address that for a moment?

Yes.

You began the comment by saying the people like what they see here, so they are investors also. I didn't hear a mass of residents saying they love this house and come in and said, well, we love this house so much, please don't destroy it. I actually heard the opposite except for two opinions. When I look at this house, it has none of the outstanding features of any traditional or classical Florida style. That house could be in Kansas and it would fit right into Kansas or Missouri. It has nothing to really stand out. I would say we must save this. And the architecture has been produced replacement of it or being proposed the replacement of it will be a better contributing historical structure if it's well built 50 years from now so the people who are there living in the neighborhood and have invested in neighborhood and are gonna have children in neighborhood this is a way to actually improve the contribution of this structure or this lot to the future.

Just to support this question about the characteristic of the arm.

I'm done now. You may speak.

No, I was going to... You're talking to me? No, I was... Oh, wow. That's a pretty aggressive response, sir. I was supposed to support you. Sorry, one second.

Thank you, but I've been interrupted several times during... Well, don't take it out on me, sir. You were about to push your button. I was making sure. Wow.

Ken, quick question. For the neighborhood, does the historic designation that was done for Bayside, was it a blanket statement or designation, or was it individually designated?

It's one designation, one district, right?

Sometimes they go through and they designate.

So every building was surveyed. There was a determination made whether they were contributing or non-contributing. et cetera, et cetera, but it is one district. One of the interesting things about Bayside is you start sort of with the Elmira subdivision and then you work your way north and the architecture does change throughout the district. So there are different representations of architecture through the district. but it is one singular district.

But that's my question, is at the time when it was designated, an individual designation for each home was researched, and that this home specifically was said... An individual survey was done, and each property was evaluated as part of the district.

So remember, the historic resource is the district. It is a singularity, made up of many pluralities, right? So you have a concentration that is representative, and that is the historic resource. So within that, you've got contributing and non-contributing. There are some places where you would have key contributing, those items that may stand alone as individual designated properties as well.

Here we just use contributing and non-contributing.

And to kind of go a little bit deeper on what he's saying, is that contributing structures are typically broken down by the date of significance. So we're looking at the date of significance of the district as a whole when it was primarily developed. And then we're looking at the primary architectural styles that are within that date of significance. Those can be vernacular. So they may not be high style or high style architectural structures. They may just be simple. or they may be vernacular, it doesn't mean that they're not contributing because they don't have high-style features.

My question comes from some neighborhoods have designation where some homes in those neighborhoods were not designated. They were removed from the designation or the broad designation. Has that happened in this neighborhood? To my knowledge, no. Basically, every home that was in the neighborhood was designated.

was surveyed as part of it.

This kind of goes to a point that I'm trying to make here, is that if that was to happen at that time when it was being designated, would this home have been accepted as part of the designation? That's my question, too. It's okay.

In the back it said that when it was added in 2015, there were 68 in total.

You read the same thing I am. Yeah, but... Yeah, that was one of them. In 1991, it was this...

property was non-contributing but then in 2015 it was added the district was resurveyed yes can i ask a question yes thanks so mr um or kenneth so this is along my my thinking as well um We've had times when people have come here and asked us to consider that a project shouldn't be considered historic or contributing or something like that. It's happened frequently. I can remember numerous times it's happened. In this particular case, architecturally, other than the blanket contributing status that the neighborhood provides. Are there significant architectural features of this residence that would make it stand out within the neighborhood? I mean, it certainly doesn't look like a lot of what I would consider to be more historic-style residences in this neighborhood. It just looks like, Mr. Campbell said, like, could be anywhere.

Right, so I can't speak for when the re-survey was done, right? And I think, like, I've had the conversation with Jordan about some properties near his house that I can't speak to why they are contributing or not contributing when the survey was done. This district, again, is representative of a broad array of styles, this being a more vernacular mid-century structure. Is it representative of that? And does it still retain that, right? Does it still, when we talk about contributing or non-contributing, it's not only from within the period of time, not only representative, but does it still convey that idea, right? So there are properties that the, That house that has a shingle mansard roof thing that was originally mission revival right does it still convey its mission revival architecture right does this convey. the mid-century elements that it was constructed with. That's something that you all need to take into consideration making a determination. Does the enclosure of the carport affect that? Does it affect the massing? Does it affect the view? Does it affect the design? Does the enclosure of the Jalousie Sun Porch affect it? Those are all things that need to be taken into your consideration. One of the other things that, and I want to speak to precedence, right? One of the things that you have to look at in terms of making a decision on, and you may say it's never appropriate to demolish a contributing structure, or you may say, yes, there are times when it are. I'm not saying there's a right or wrong, right? But what I'm saying is if you're going to make that determination, you have to look at it in terms of how that affects the resource. The resource is the district, right? So is it a contributing structure? on the boundary of the district. Would that impact the district greater than a structure within the district? Are you then dealing with redrawing boundaries and how that affects it? So there are lots of things to think about in terms of a decision in this case. It's probably more than you asked for.

That's super helpful. Can I ask one more question, please? So in a scenario like this, the residence has an appraised value, correct? And if you were to modify the residence or start making improvements to the residence to potentially make it more conducive for your family or in any kind of capacity, if you wanted to add on to it or do anything, as soon as you went beyond half of the appraised value of the house, you'd have to bring the whole house up to code, correct? You can't because it's below flood elevation.

That's the reason where we ran into when we presented originally.

So you would have to modify more than half of the cost of this residence. If I'm not mistaken, if you wanted to invest more, you'd have to bring it up to code, but you couldn't because of the flood zone. The floor is too low. So within... Within... Yeah, and the insurance issue. So I just think that all of this has to be weighed in in some capacity. It's not necessarily... I mean, there are shades of how to look at this.

So through the chair. So within registered historic districts, dependent on the scope of work, applicants can request a FEMA waiver letter, right? Or a FEMA exemption letter. And that would allow certain projects to move forward... within the floodplain. That is not guaranteed and is not guaranteed in the city of Miami. They have to go through a waiver process through flood. So just issuing the FEMA exemption letter doesn't mean that they're guaranteed the waiver to build on that. And one has to think there's a property on the Miami River, right? We can issue the waiver letter, the exemption letter, but Is it still appropriate? I'm not saying yes or no, right? Would it still be appropriate to allow that construction to continue given the properties downriver, right? So those are things that have to be thought of too in terms of how we're addressing larger issues that Bob has discussed, right? This is a larger issue. But right now, we're dealing with this singular property within the district. There's a proposal before you. If there are questions or concerns that the applicants can provide, there you are.

Thank you. You're welcome. All right, so this is not an easy topic. Obviously, there's some contention happening between some of the board members. But I think what we do here is follow the guidelines And I look at them as an architect, as guidelines. They guide us in a direction. It's not that they're hard lines, and it's not that they are walls to prevent us from doing anything in our purview to make decisions that may be a precedent for other properties. We're looking at this individual property. We are assessing its merit. I will say that the house, from an architect's perspective, It doesn't scream out something that I would have designated if it had come before me as part of the blanket designation. It was designated. There's a lot of things about it that are making it separate from the rest of the neighborhood, one being the size of the lot, the other being the placement of the house on the lot. The fact that the house itself was altered to an extreme measure on the facade, that it doesn't look the way it was originally designed. You add in all of the turmoil that we discussed now three times with these fine gentlemen. I would say that I would lean towards approving the demolition and complimenting them on the updates to their design set.

If I may weigh in briefly, Chair. Bob, I think you're right for your recalcitrance in this. I think ultimately... there should be a very high bar should we ever consider approving a demolition. And I think broadly you've articulated that really well. And I very much am inclined to kind of take that tack as well. I think the extenuating factor with this particular item is that the applicant has, in my opinion, demonstrated a pretty substantial amount of extenuation and mitigating circumstances, particularly I mean, I'm taking it at your word that you intended to initially renovate it. And I do... I was on the board when this maybe came through. I just don't remember it perfectly. But I think we talked about it at length at the previous meeting. So I think fundamentally... This is one of those items that, because there was an intent to pursue a renovation, because he has clearly dealt with a significant number of circumstances in the lead up to this, and further, because there were a large number of potential items that could have yielded extensively expensive code violations, which he's clearly been attentive to, I'm inclined to also agree with Mr. Campbell Mr. Trachtenberg and be inclined to approve simply on that basis. I mean, I think, to your point, we should, by default, protect historic buildings. I mean, I think that is the raison d'être of this board. But I think the reason this board exists as well is to provide a deliberative thought process to all the items that come before us. And I worry, as historic designation proceeds through the into the high pace of redevelopment that's been hitting our city in the last few years, that the only chance we have at preserving historic properties is having owners come and voluntarily designate them. And I worry that if we come across as too rigid and maybe too... too unyielding in our views that we might dissuade some of those people from doing so. So I think it's important that we continue our role as a deliberative body, that we continue to uphold the intent of preservation first and foremost, but I think it's also important to consider the circumstances of each individual item. So that's where I land.

And to your point, the issue at hand is it's going to cost him money to take it down. That could have gone into lifting it up. and moving it. You guys are all making this about money. Oh, well, the cost, the cost, the cost. That's not our concern. It really is not. He could pick that up for $200,000, move it to the other side of the property, and raise it up. He couldn't build 2,000 square feet for $200,000. I'm just saying, he couldn't do that. So, I mean, I don't understand everybody's issue about this. And then the new addition onto the back of it would be, it would all be kosher at that stage. Everything would be kosher at that stage. He could do whatever he wanted, okay? But that's not, you guys are going to the easiest cause of action and not truly looking at the true cause. It's not up to us to decide whether something is valuable. It was valuable at the time, And by the way, Baxter and Baxter were the architects, so they actually put their name when they designed it. Do you know that we have whole properties in this that are built more fabulous that have no architectural on them? This guy actually put his name on it. And you know what? I'm sorry that it's a financial thing. The other thing to do is, like I told you, put the property up for sale and sell it to somebody who wants to go and do something like that. But I got to tell you something. You want to make the front page of the Miami Herald? Lift that house up. Add on to the back of it. You'll make the front page. And not only that, you will set the trend for that whole district to do that. I'm just saying. But the easier, softer way is to knock it down. And you have owned it for an extended period of time. That's all I can say to you. It wasn't like you just bought it two years ago and have gone through. No, you've owned this since 2019. So this isn't like some day you just woke up and just, you decided this a very long time ago. Yes, you did. And that's okay. You've convinced this board that that's okay. He can tell you that. He can tell you that. All I can tell you is that through the chair, through the chair. I think you've made your point.

You're speaking of the chair. I believe Mr. Fuentes would like to speak, and then I believe the board should refocus.

Yes. Thank you. I think everyone has made their point. Go ahead, Mr. Fuentes. Thank you.

Well, I just want to... I just want to mention something for the record that I think is important that relates to vernacular architecture, right? And the idea that vernacular architecture is of lesser value and is of something that is more, let's say, disposable. It's not. And I'm going to make a comparison that probably you all are going to understand very well. We have in art, we have the academic tradition. where we have people like Picasso, and we have the greatest artists, right? And in the case of Miami, for instance, we have who doesn't know , one of the greatest artists in Miami, and lift up, you know, a lot of the cultural scene in Little Haiti. But we also have . And purpose young is like to make that parallel, that vernacular architecture that is also true to Miami, that is also important to keep. And I think that in many cases characterizes the neighborhood that make this city what it is. And, you know, I used to come to Miami from New York and I was just joking all the time with my family, just teasing them. oh my God, look at these tiny little houses and, you know, so flat and all of that in comparison, of course, to New York. But that's what the character of the architecture of Miami is. And it responds to the plains. It responds to the fact that we are living in a swamp that has been dried out. But, you know, so I think that's something that we also have to take into account just to make sure that When we talk about vernacular architecture, we're not talking about lesser value type of architecture. It's really, I think it's really important. So the fact that this doesn't have all of those extraordinary, you know, neoclassical or mission style or whatever you want to call it, it doesn't mean that it doesn't have value. And I think that's also something to take into account.

Thank you. Are we ready for a motion?

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Go ahead, Mr. Campbell.

I would like to set a motion to approve the special certificate of appropriateness to permit demolition of a contributing structure and new construction of two structures located at 888 Northeast 71st Street within the Bayside Historic District with all conditions as stipulated by staff.

That would be the eight on the screen at the present time? That's the eight on the screen here? Yes, yes. Okay. Is there a second to that motion?

I'll second the motion.

Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Have a roll call, please.

Mr. Robert Powers? No. Mr. Christopher Colley?

Yes.

Mr. Jordan Trachtenberg? Yes. Mr. Hugh Ryan? No. Mr. Najeeb Campbell?

Yes.

Mr. Luis Frito-Yamuneos?

Yes.

Mr. Elvis Fuentes?

No.

Dr. William Harper?

Yes.

Motion passes 6-2.

And thank you both for taking all of our comments into consideration. You did a great job. Yes, thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.

I thank you for your attention. I thank Bob as well. My intention has never been to cause any harm in this neighborhood. My intention has never been to create this chaos, my intention has never been to be unconforming to what you guys stand for. My intention has always been to be somebody that is looked up to as the one that is there to support, to motivate, and to push forward for what you stand for. If it wasn't for the circumstances that this project has put us in front of, I would have agreed with, and I would have done everything Bob has recommended. My intention, Never, never. My dad's there. Javier is there. Our intention was never to go and demolish this property. We never purchased this with this intention. Our intention was to live there.

You've also dealt with COVID, Surfside.

Our board, our first meeting that we ever had was through Zoom.

Yeah, yeah. No, no. But I'm saying, I'm saying, and the building department's reaction to all these things and high tides. So you're dealing with all this stuff. I understand. But congratulations.

Thank you so much. And I believe you have another statement to add.

This decision is final unless appealed in the hearing boards division within 15 days.

Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Okay. Everybody take a deep breath. And we'll move on to item number three.

A resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2 parenthesis B parenthesis 4 of the City Code of Ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit after the fact alterations to a non-contributing property Located approximately at 6337 Northeast 5th Avenue, 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?

Yes.

Please come forward and give your name and address for the record.

My name is Larry Sims, owner of 6337 Northeast Fifth Avenue.

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

So 6337 is two buildings on a corner lot. So you see here on this map, the official 6337 is the north building, and then we have 6335 to the south. Okay.

So this... Oh, you need to give your name.

Oh, Christina Zhang, Historic Preservation Planner. Thanks. So this application is for after-the-fact approval of windows, doors, and awning that does not meet our historic design guidelines. So just to review our guidelines for windows and doors. When replacing windows, you're supposed to go back to the original window type. If you need to replace it, the door should maintain the original location, size, and type. New windows must be clear glass, new mutants must be applied, raised profile with a contoured shape, and replacement of a solid panel door with an all glass door is not permitted. For canopies and awnings, if you need to replace the awning, you should go back to the original design of the awning. If awnings are not original, they should be based on the architectural style of the building, and the awning should only cover the specific window or door when it's applied and should not be extended beyond the opening. So those are our historic design guidelines for our awnings. So if you look at here is the historic tax card, we have the original casement windows and you see there is original awning on the 6337 building. So that's the one to the north. The photo to the right is the building to the south. This is in our records what we have in 2016. So you see there was an awning there at that time. This was before it was replaced. And we have a photo for the second building too. And you see where the previous awning were and what kind of windows were there. So here are some current photographs. So this is the building to the north. So you see it was replaced with horizontal sliding windows. At the time of the replacement, if it had gone through the building permit process and been reviewed by HEP, we would have recommended the casement. That's going back to the original type. We also see the awning has a new fabric on it. Position is not on the fabric, it's more at that time the awning should have been the one based on the historic awning. So we see the other side of the same building, a similar awning, similar replacement. And here's a current photo of the second building and we see some awnings were removed and so they did keep one at that time. And we have horizontal sliding windows with tinted glass. Yes, that is, yeah. So the main ones is the north and then the west. So we see the other side is also horizontal sliding windows with the tinted glass on the second building, the sides of the building. So just to sum up, it does not meet the historic design guidelines. We would have approved the original casement windows, a mutton profile on those windows, clear glass, the historic door should be replaced with something more similar, and the awning to go back to the historic awning. For the second building, similarly, the casement window should have been replaced on the second story. There was a hung sash, the mutton profile to be replicated, clear glass, and the historic door to go back to, you know, a more historic panel door. So our position and our recommendation to the board is to deny the after-the-fact alterations. We do recommend to go back to what would be approved under historic design guidelines.

Is that it? Okay, thank you. Your turn. Would you like to respond to the staff report?

Yeah, I purchased the home in 2002. I've lived there the whole time. I'm going to start with the awnings because that happened first. I contracted with a company to do the awnings. This is the permit that was pulled.

Could you get a little closer to your microphone? Yeah, sorry. This was in 2003.

As far as I was concerned, I thought that these awnings, the original awnings, now there have been some changes, and I'll get into that, but the awnings that were across the smaller building, and I had one awning on the north porch, I was told that the The permit had been closed out. And until last year, until I got violated for that, I had no idea that there was a problem with the awnings. After a bad hurricane season, I took the awnings off the smaller building. And because it was too much trouble and they were too busy and it was kind of a mess, I didn't get new awnings. I repurposed what was on that building and put over the front of the property. and left the cover over the entrance of the smaller building. And then on the porch, this is the north porch, I took that down ultimately and replaced it with a sun setter awning. The permitting for that, I honestly didn't think that there was an issue with the sun setter. They're not actually attached to the house. They attach to these hooks and lock in, but you can roll it out. You can roll it in when there's storms. There's, you know, I can take them off in hurricanes. And so that's, that's where I, that's, that's kind of how I ended up with what I have. The original intent was not to not pull a permit. I, you know, So, and then we'll get to the windows. So when I purchased the house, the older pictures of the house in the 1950s, I don't know when those windows were replaced, but those are not the windows that I inherited. The house already, it had a couple of the windows that you could crank out and back. Most of the windows were replaced windows that went up and down. There were some jalousies left over in the back, but I had three different styles of windows. So what I did was And the other thing is all of the windows were covered with these big, huge metal graded boxes for, you know, that, you know, all the way around. So with no safety latches, I lived with that for a long time. And then, so when I went to replace the windows, the people that I talked to, the man that came out that, Because I was only going to do one window at a time as I could afford it. And I wanted to replace the windows with impact windows for hurricane mitigation, I guess you could call it. So, he said, look, if you're doing one window at a time, and you're doing it every, you know, you don't need a permit for that. We'll just do one window at a time. And that's what I did for three and a half years. So, all of those windows that were changed happened over about a three and a half year period. I chose compact windows and I chose the sliders based on what was in the neighborhood and what still is in the neighborhood. I prepared these.

Don't speak until you get back to your microphone. So.

I chose sliders, I thought they went well with the house and I chose them because they're throughout our neighborhood. The pictures that I have attached are contributing and non-contributing homes that have sliders. 460 Northeast 74th Street is 1925. It has sliders. 424 Northeast 63rd Street, new construction, sliders, and that's just around the corner from me. 5985, that's a side picture of that house. I couldn't get a good picture of the front, but it's 1949 construction, sliders. 5990 Northeast Fifth Avenue. It's a house that's a little bit more like mine, branch style, built in 1949, sliders. 511 Northeast 76th Street. House was built in 1953, sliders. And then the last picture is a picture of mine. It's when the windows were first put in, but it's just a little better picture that you can see them from. from inside. You know, the windows that I purchased, they were, they all had NOAs. The windows, you know, I think they were properly installed. And, you know, I take responsibility for the decision that I made back then. But, you know, that's where I am. The windows went in from, you know, they either started in late 2014 to 2018. I have between 2015 and 2018, looking at Google Street View.

May I ask a couple questions?

Wait a minute, not yet. Does that conclude your presentation, sir?

Yeah, I mean, if you have questions. I may have left things out, but...

Okay. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and open it up to the board for questions or comments now. You can go ahead, Chris.

Okay, thank you for all that information. Just a couple quick questions, just putting it kind of in a summary. So when you replaced the windows, when you started replacing the windows, because you were able to do it individually, you didn't need to submit like one full package to the city or something?

Is that what happened? Well, the guy from the window company said, if you're doing one window at a time and you don't know when you're going to be doing the next one, you don't need a permit for it. And I was like, okay, that's great.

Okay. Got it. And then I'm sure some of our board members that do a lot of window replacements and build things, they probably understand some of that process. And then with regards to the awnings, it sounds like what happens here is that you have two properties, correct?

Well, it's one, two buildings on one.

Right. And it sounds like you're trying to improve them and there was elements that were not great. you're going through the process of you know doing your best to make them better and then it turns out that uh all of a sudden you have uh violations because they're different than either what would be allowable in the district or didn't necessarily go through a certain process right correct yes so um and then okay thank you very much for that uh i have a a question for the architects on the board just for my own edification. The windows in the mountains, I know that there was a case here recently that we looked at where there were suggestions that were made to how to make the windows look a little bit more consistent with what they would have been historically. Is that something that can happen in a scenario like this, potentially? That would be, you know, there was a time when people were just able to apply some of those decorative features instead of, like, all of a sudden, how do you go back and rehash the entire past?

Yeah.

So that's my kind of question for the board based on what we're seeing here. And thanks for the information.

Yeah. You know, one last thing. You know, I supported... our neighborhood becoming a historic district. And I still do. And I think if I could put all of you in my car and drive over there right now, I think you would think that I really was an active participant in the neighborhood. I think the assessment here, I understand, you know, there were mistakes made on this end, but I don't think it has taken away from the neighborhood. I think, you know, it really does stand out, and I think, you know, I have a lot of good neighbors, and I think I fit nicely into the neighborhood.

This has been a good confession as far as this goes. Now, back to what we were talking about in the last item about precedent. it's not a precedent with us as much as it is a precedent with the neighbors. So when they see someone do something or they see something done and then legalized, the residents are the ones that say, well, I can do it. I mean, this is a good example of that. It's not, we take it case by case, but out there is what Mr. Powers was worried about was three people, you know, seeing something and pushing, pushing, pushing. I mean, we've had this come up before. The last one was slightly different because the guy had a permit to do an entire building, just it wasn't reviewed or something along those lines. This is like that Johnny Cash song, One Piece at a Time. You kind of did one every couple months and one every couple months.

Three and a half years, yeah.

You know, I mean, that gets into the matter of are they inspected or could they be inspected?

It's the same company. The windows.

Well, that's fine. I mean, but it's the city that comes out to look at it. Right. They'll see.

Yeah.

I don't know. I mean, I'll let people discuss it as far as the window pattern design, especially facing the front. Yeah. I don't really have a strong opinion about the awnings because awnings are gone in a hurricane anyway, but windows are a little more permanent.

Yeah, I'm not married to the awnings. They serve a purpose, you know, but they're, you know, I'm, you know.

I'll let other people discuss.

Other questions?

Well, this window replacement issue just keeps coming. And with this packet of photographs, I'm realizing something. There has to be some standard that we or the neighbors or the guidelines stand on. So are the residents rebelling against their own standards where there are so many examples? And therefore, if the neighborhood is rebelling against their own standards, then why can't everyone just do the same thing? Or are we going to single out one person to make an example of the many that have rebelled? And thirdly, being someone that you said were actively involved and supportive of the area becoming historic, why then didn't you try to get the right window in order to continue your enthusiastic... You know, that's just my ignorance. So this is where I'm a little... unsure of what's going on. Lots of rebellion, but then you love your historic guidelines, but then there's a cost issue also because windows are expensive. It's very strange.

It wasn't really a rebellion. I looked at other ranches in the neighborhood. I installed what I saw.

Right. I'm not saying you are the only rebel.

It's a

neighborhood-wide rebellion against, and why are you here and why are these other people here? And you are here for your windows, but they aren't, but they're doing it. So it is very strange.

Some of those are new construction. I'm assuming they were recently approved. They're not all, there's three of those properties that were done in the last year or two.

Well, that's why this is case-by-case, and you can't bring in new construction.

Right, and so if I can just interject through the chair. Remember, we try to treat everyone the same, but the same treatment isn't always appropriate for each property, right? So I can, and I'm not going to go into was it permitted, was it not permitted, but I can look at some of these and say, okay, this house is likely post-1950. it probably had jealousy windows in it historically, so side rollers would then be an appropriate selection for that, right? If we don't have documentation that it was casement windows. So while I appreciate the applicant and I understand they come in with this, I don't want the board to assume that this is somehow rebellion, right? That there are people not doing everything

The right way just remember like some of these it may be appropriate some of them it may not be Right, but the other thing also just to your point and to support you Is that we haven't had a full historic staff for a very long time? So a lot of stuff fell through the thing because simply there wasn't enough staff members to go through everything We presently on that block on his block on 64th Street There's three houses that have significantly altered the front of their homes, significantly, significantly, and their contributing structures. None of that has come before this board. None of it. And I'm talking about when you see them, you're going to go, you've got to be kidding me. And it's only because I have to report them. Nobody else reports them. So they're going to be coming before this board. But I will tell you, my windows, of which I have 62 of in my house, 62 windows, is $140,000 to replace the windows the way that the historic preservation officer wants them replaced. Okay? I don't have that kind of money. So I have to do them one at a time. Okay?

That's what he did.

one at a time. And I don't have to pull a permit to do them one at a time. I did because I sit on this board and I'm involved in the historic designation of my neighborhood. It would be remiss of me to do that when I come up here and tell other people what they have to do. So I went through that whole program, waited six and a half weeks to finally get them in the middle of hurricane season when, I'm just letting you know, I think it was almost three months that I waited for the approval for those windows. And they were $20,000 to replace two windows. So it's expensive. It's not cheap. I have a Florida room, which, by the way, in order for me to put windows in those Florida rooms, which there are now presently windows in, I have to put in solid glass panels for them to resonate what a screened enclosure would have looked like. And they're on the east side of the house, which means I don't get the benefit of a breeze. So do you think I'm changing those windows? No. They're going to stay there. They're aluminum awning windows because they don't make awning windows anymore. There's all kinds of things that when you're on the ground and having to do this stuff, there's other ways to do it. And as far, Larry's always been a very active person in our neighborhood association. I'm not condoning what he did, but literally every property in that neighborhood has sliding windows now because they're the least expensive and they're what is on the market for people You can't get awning windows, and the casement windows are tremendously expensive. So I don't know, guys. I mean, I don't know how to answer the question.

This is why I was suggesting, or I'm curious, it seems to me to be that maybe the best possible thing we could do here, based on everything that everyone's mentioned, is And what could be done in this particular case, for example? Say this was an example and we were gonna see 30 other projects that were similar to this. Is there anything that could be done architecturally to make maybe the front portions of the residence or something like that appear to be more conducive? And I mean, I'm curious because the styles of the residences and the styles of the architecture vary so much. And like you mentioned, in certain cases, a horizontal window could be appropriate. And in others, it may not. So let me ask you this. If somebody wanted to replace the windows wholeheartedly in a residence like this, and their contractor mentioned, well, that's, you know, you have to go to the Historic Environmental Preservation Board to talk about that. Are there guidelines that can be given? Or do they have to literally draw a set of plans for every project? You know, like there's certain roof tiles that we accept. There's certain things that we accept when you don't have to come to the board. What would happen in a case like this?

So in a case like this, an application would be submitted to the building department. which would likely have a plan, generally not elevations. We request elevations. We request, and then what we do is we double check the historic photos. If we have the tax card available, we look at that too, because sometimes we can't tell in the photo, but sometimes you can see, like it will say in the tax card, metal jealousy, or it will say wood, in which case we know it probably wasn't jealousy, right? And so then our guidelines stipulate the if we have documentation of the original type and function That it should as closely match that as possible, right? So if historically the house had casement windows we would expect to see Casement windows go back in if they were divided light. We'd expect them to be divided light if they were hung sash or single or double, we're okay, right? If there's no documentation, then we look to what would be appropriate for that style, right? So is it a 1920s mission revival? We would expect that to likely be a wood casement or wood hung sash, right? So we would want casement or hung sash in that, likely hung sash. We wouldn't be so specific about divided lights and things like that because we don't have that documentation. So that's how our guidelines play into this. I think what you've got before you is, again, one of those situations where you have, and again, it's 1947, I believe. Technically, our guidelines are post-1950. Jealousy windows, side rollers is okay. I think Hughes said it before on this board, a year or two in either direction, right? That's your discretion. So what you have before you, and you have to determine the appropriate approach is, are the windows as they are appropriate? And there are different theories about applying muntins That aren't real buttons We could debate that we could debate that right is is a pragmatic approach to reapply or to apply mountains to make it appear more appropriate. So it appears more like this, a decision, or do you say the windows that are visible from the public right of way are wrong? Take them out and start again. That's sort of the options you have before you. Um, and it's, it's at your discretion, right?

Anyone else have questions? I have two. One is to Bob. I noticed that this was not a designated house. Remember why it was non-contributing?

It's non-contributing and it was taken out.

Ellen, those were some of the ones that you quizzed her about why they were removed. And now that he has a full staff, I'd like to...

We'll probably revisit that. Do you remember why it was not? No, sir. As you know, you quizzed her from this dais, and it was very arbitrary the way that she went about doing it, to be very honest with you.

Because it looks rather intact. It does. It looks cleaner and neater. And my other question is, the original door looks to me like a screen door. It was.

Well, there's a screen door on it. Because when I photographed that house back in 2004, it had a screen door on it. I don't know what the door behind it was, to answer your question.

If you were asking. Yes. So I'm not sure that this existing door would be completely inappropriate. LOOKS SORT OF LIKE THE SCREEN DOOR WOULD HAVE LOOKED PREVIOUSLY.

SO THIS IS A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. which in the end doesn't have the same general requirements that a historic structure would have, right? A contributing structure. So when it comes to the windows on a non-historic home. Non-contributing. Sorry, excuse me. Non-contributing in a historic neighborhood. Right. Why is it that we have

So if it is from within, specifically if it's within the period of significance, then we would seek to have it go back to what it was, right? So could it be restored to what it was? And therefore, hopefully, in a resurvey, if that takes place, be considered contributing. Okay.

I think this is an interesting.

Yep.

I think also that even if it's a non-contributing structure, we still want the window style to be architecturally appropriate for the structure, right? So I kind of triage windows a lot of times when I'm thinking about them. The first thing that I look at is does the replacement fit the original opening, right? Does it fit the original opening? In this case, it does. And if it doesn't, does it maintain the header height of the original header height? Because that's very important architecturally. And remember that in historic preservation, a lot of what we're doing is preserving spatial characteristics, right? So kind of triaging those in order. So does it meet the original, fit the original opening size? Does it keep the original header? Then is the replacement window the same style in terms of operation? Is it a casement to casement? Is it gone from a jollicy window, and we know that jollicy windows don't exist, so then at that time we might try to pick something that either mimics that or would be architecturally appropriate. If it had a casement window before, then we would ask for the casement to go back. And then because we allow impact windows, then we can allow the impact windows, it doesn't have to be a material in kind transition. Of course, we would love for you to put an in-kind replacement in, but because we allow the impact, it doesn't. Then we say, should there be applied muttons or mullions or not? We can debate that. We often do in the office.

And so, again— We have that here in this building.

And so, again, that's kind of up to your discretion. So that's kind of how I triage it. So to me, you know, once you modify the opening size, you will never get it back. It will be 100 years before you ever get that size of that window back. So that's kind of how I triage them in terms of what you're looking at. So in this case, you're just down to the type of window. Is the type of window that was replaced with Odyssey of A appropriate for this structure or not? If it is appropriate, then if you feel that it is appropriate, then I think your decision is pretty simple. If it's not, then how can we make it appropriate? Does it need to be replaced with the correct style or operational style window? Or can something like applied muttons or mullions help mitigate the different style, the different type of window style.

That was very clearly explained. Thank you. I will say that based on the fact that it is a non-contributing structure in the neighborhood, and that I notice or see that you've taken very nice care of your home over the last 23 years. I'm also a neighbor in your neighborhood. I would say from my perspective that the way I would solve this would be to apply mutants, which is an after-the-fact thing you can do without having to remove your windows, to align with the original aesthetic. I think the function, because it's a non-contributing structure, at least in this case for me, is not that important. I would say that the conversation around the awnings, I agree with Mr. Ryan that these are all kind of replaceable, and they seem kind of ephemeral by nature. So I don't really have much opinion on that. So if I was to try to make a motion to solve this, I would just find the opportunity to apply the muttons in the same aesthetic and location as the original tax card photos.

Is that a motion? No. No, no, no.

That's not a motion. Sorry. If I was to, that's what I would suggest.

So I was going to say, when it comes time for a motion, which would be right now, I would like for it to include three things. One, the treatment of the windows. Number two, what we do about the awnings. And number three, what we do about the door.

When it comes to the door, I agree with you in that the screen door does give a similar aesthetic. It doesn't work on the back house garage in that manner, because it didn't have that. It was a solid door. I don't particularly mind the door because it's a non-contributing structure. I leave that to the rest of the board to agree to that. But that's my stance.

Any other questions, or are we ready for a motion?

I would also say that this is somebody's home that is homestead exempted, and it's a non-contributing structure in a historic district.

Bob, can you please use your mic? We can't hear you over here.

Really?

Yeah.

Wow. That's a first. Man. Okay, I'll speak lower. I'll use my radio voice. At any rate, so, because it's, you know, it's not to, I know your job is tremendously difficult. I know it is. I don't diminish what you do, and I appreciate everything and all your efforts that you put into it. I really do. And I thank you very much for doing what you do. I do. I value it greatly. In this case, it's a home that's homestead exempted. The persons live there. They've never rented it out. It was not one of those kind of things. He would have done the same thing I would have done, that if I took something down, I would reuse it somewhere else on my property, which is what anybody would do if they remove something so I don't even have an issue. about, I think that when it comes time to recover it, or recover them, perhaps you should have that conversation with historic preservation, I would say. And I also support my colleague, Dr. Hopper, on the fact that perhaps you should put the mullions at least on a portion of the windows, because I... In my case, I have the same kind of opening. And I will say the other really good thing about this is that you didn't close in any of your windows or make them smaller. And I think that is a more important thing because what we have a problem of in our neighborhood is when they change out the windows, they change the size of the window itself that affects the architecture of the house. It really does. It makes it look horrible. And you have big windows like I do, which... makes our living rooms really beautiful and our dining rooms really beautiful, and I'm glad that you left them that side. So I would proffer something to the effect of making this as easy as possible to move it forward, thank you.

No windows or doors were, the sizes were changed for any of this.

I think Jordan should make a motion.

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion, Dr. Hopper. Yes, sir. I'd like to make a motion that item number three be approved with the condition that the existing windows that are visibly facing the street include applied muttons. The raised type, is that right?

that you're looking for? Yes.

It's the raised type of muttons. Regarding the door, I would just maintain the original door as, I mean, the door that you have on site. The second door on the second building, I'm okay with it maintaining itself as well. And then for the awnings There no no recommendation. Just solely the one condition to apply the months I'll second that The motion is second any discussion on the motion of a guy.

I do a quick question for the city if This gentleman was in the first place to pull a permit for the windows. I This is non-contributing. At first, I thought this was, I didn't read it close enough, and I thought it was contributing. It looks nice. But would it have gone in front of you? The promoter would have come to us, yes, for review. I mean, I understand. I'm just wondering if you have the same scrutiny because it's non-contributing. All right.

Well, that brings up a question for other houses that we're seeing in the neighborhood. What happens now with the contributing structures that have non-approved windows? Is this something that is going through the board? I mean, the staff at the moment?

So, and I will say that this is, these are not unusual, this is not unique to Miami by any means. Windows in lots of cities I've worked in have gotten changed out in historic districts without permits and without certificates of appropriateness. Sometimes the neighbor calls, sometimes an inspector sees it. Most cities do not have zoning inspectors, that's rare. And most cities do not have historic and preservation inspectors. So therefore, we come up with various ways to rely on finding out when people replace their windows without a certificate of appropriateness. please remember that regardless of whether a permit is required, a certificate of appropriateness is always required for exterior work. So even if you don't require a building permit, you're only doing one window, you still have to come get a C of A, we can issue that without you having to get a building permit. So we require, as part of our application procedure, we require that applicants submit current photos Sometimes people come in, for example, they come in to get a pool and they upload their current photos of their house. We see that they've replaced their windows. At that time, we'll try to work through some of these instances with them, or we might have them apply for an after the fact CV to come to the board. So we try to wrap it together as much as we can and deal with it as it comes up on a case by case basis. and work through, and again, work through that as it comes up. And sometimes it's us sitting in our office looking at, I mean, this happened on Friday. We looked at a tax card and we thought it was a certain type window and I zoomed in and Ken got it. It was actually the blind from the inside and it was making, the blinds from the inside was making it appear to be a different type of window, right? So sometimes it takes us a minute to get through it and to see it. but we try to work through those on a case-by-case basis because that's what we have the ability to do as a staff.

And sorry, one last follow-up question. And what happens if there's, let's say one of these houses that are in this package here has a permit for those windows and it was approved, that window type, and they were installed and then they were completely, they were certified and it was all signed off and they closed out their permit, but then they're not aligning with the, historic preservation standards.

Right, so then we look in to see if somebody from our staff reviewed that building permit, if we were in fact actually tagged and approved. Typically, for example, if it came in and they got a building permit for the windows, it was reviewed by HEP staff and approved by HEP staff, typically we might just issue them a separate C of A, kind of clarifying the errors and put it in the file and let it go on. If it has gone to building to get a permit, It's been, they've gotten their permit. It never came to HEP for review. It never came to our staff for review. It's been inspected. A lot of the times we'll try to clarify that with a separate C of A and they may have to come to this board because again, remember that a certificate of appropriateness is required regardless of whether or not you need a building permit. And often, in most places, the C of A is required before you start your building permit. We try to do that parallel here to save our applicants and homeowners time so they can go through the building plan process as well as the HEP process simultaneously. So that's one of the things we do, but you can always come in. So say that you know right now in January you want to replace your windows, you can come in and separately get a certificate of appropriateness to replace your windows and then take that and go to building and make that process a little bit smoother. So you can always come before and get your C of A. I think that's great to have on the record.

Hopefully everyone's paying attention. Thank you.

We're also doing Historic Preservation 101 workshops toward the end of the month and the beginning of next month. And so we're going to invite all historic property owners to those workshops. And these are the types of things we'll go over there. Great.

So back to the motion, and you can answer that question.

I believe there were no other questions about the motion.

Is that correct? We have a roll call, please.

Mr. Robert Powers?

Yes.

Mr. Christopher Cawley?

Yes.

Mr. Jordan Trachtenberg?

Yes.

Mr. Hugh Ryan?

Yes.

Mr. Najeeb Campbell?

Yes.

Mr. Elvis Fuentes?

Yes.

Mr. Luis Brito y Munoz?

Yes.

Dr. William Harper?

Yes.

Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you.

These are very high quality photos.

Thank you. This decision is appealable in the hearing board's division within 15 days.

Thank you and now you may answer the question about where and when the workshops were were actually working on finalizing the locations with parks department now so we don't have that just yet great, thank you and we're on the item number 4.

A resolution of the Miami historic and environmental preservation board pursuant to section 23 dash 6.2 parentheses four of the city code of ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness for partial demolition. In addition, alterations and to permit after the fact alterations and site improvements to a non contributing property located approximately at six zero six northeast. 56th Street, Miami, Florida, 33137, within the Morningside Historic District, further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A, with the following findings.

Thank you, Ms. Abbott. Mr. President? Is the applicant present?

Yes.

Please give your name and address for the record.

My name is Melissa Osendi. On behalf of Mark Supino, my address is 2221 Northwest 6th Street. Mark Supino's address is 606 Northeast 56th Street. I submitted a power of attorney to Christina.

Thank you. That was going to be my next question.

Say it again, sir.

I said thank you. That was going to be my next question.

Thank you.

Okay, we'll start with the staff report.

So this is for our special certificate of appropriateness, partial demolition, in addition, alterations, and after the fact review of alterations that don't meet the historic design guidelines.

Okay.

Location, it's in Morningside. So you have a kind of like overview map here. Here are some current photographs of the house. So it's a one story. And you do see the light fixture here. So the partial demolition is shown here. They're going to take out the garage.

I'm sorry, could you go back a second? Which direction is north? North to the left?

North is to the left, yes. Okay. I think so. So here's the second floor plan. The addition will take the rear half of the roof and also kind of have an L shape that goes into the first half of the roof. So here's the existing with the proposed, you see the second floor addition with the round windows here. Here's our east elevation side. And the west elevation, you see there's a stucco texture detail that goes from one side to the other. around that round window. Here's some renderings, the front and the back. Here's a context showing the height and massing of the immediate neighbors. The immediate neighbors are contributing properties. We do have a two-story addition approved on one of them. So our guideline for exterior walls is the original light fixture should be replaced in kind or to match as closely as possible to the original in dimension and materials. And for our gates, horizontal fencing patterns are not allowed. Gates must be one foot behind the front facade. That's a Morningside Historic District specific guideline. And it should provide 60% visibility with design and color complementary to the home. So this is for the after the fact alterations. You see the light here, which is not what was the original fixture, which was more like a small black lantern type that you see in our districts frequently. And we have the horizontal patterned gates here. So that doesn't meet our guidelines. And so that's why we're bringing here for after the fact approval. Similarly, so our recommendation is approval with conditions. So most of the conditions are standard conditions. I do have window 27 and 28 in the addition to be rectangular, to be more in keeping with the district. We also have the outline of the original garage to be preserved. It can recess to have that opening. That's how we would recommend infill over garage. We have the planter you see in this rendering has those scored lines like in around the window. So we did say we like that to have that in the drawings that they didn't have that in the drawing. So we just, you know, would recommend that we keep that and put that into the drawings. And just that there'd be sufficient landscaping at the rear for the two houses to the rear of the house are one story. So they would have some views of the second story addition. So those are our conditions that we would recommend to the board.

Is that it?

Yes.

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

Yes. We're good with all conditions except four and five. Mr. Cepino would like to keep window 27 and 28 as designed.

Could you identify which ones those are?

Say that again, I'm sorry?

Could you please identify which two windows those are?

Yes, they're on the west side in the rear, and they're going to pull them up now. You can barely see them from the front or the right away of the house. See, they're the two circular top windows at the back. And with everything in the front, it's hard to see. You literally have to be inside the next door neighbor's house and to the side of his house to see them. From the sidewalk, you won't be able to see them. So he wanted to try as much as possible to keep it the way it's designed. And for number five, the outline of the garage, there are other houses that look just like that, and he wanted to continue how the original entrance of the house is, and he wanted to keep it as designed without the garage lining.

Is that it?

Yes. Oh, okay.

Okay. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and open up to the board for questions or comments.

This one is non-contributing as well?

Yes.

Okay.

I would like to make one correction, however, in your presentation on... So I cut off the... The page number, I have G-1.0, but it's the slide that has the four houses in the neighborhood with the identified in boxes. Not that one. Nope. Not that one.

11 or 18? The one with the...

I have 8.4... Page 571.

It's got four pictures with the dotted line boxes on the second floor.

Yes. On that one, you'll also notice that the garage is even with the porch pillars, I guess you would call those. Is that what he wants to maintain rather than push it back?

The recommendation is that we can keep the circular windows, but she wants the indent of the garage door. That's what we're reading here. She wants the outline of the original garage door to be protruded. We could keep those windows, the W3, W2, W1. We can keep them, but she wants the original garage door lining indented into the structure.

Okay.

And that's what we're reading here.

Can we keep looking for those?

And they want it recessed, and we apologize.

Yeah. Can we keep looking for that picture with the four boxes?

Yeah, that is not in the presentation, but it is in the report.

In the report, one of the houses is misidentified. The one that's identified as 525 Northeast 56th is actually 541 56th.

Can I bring up the architect to discuss this with you?

Sure.

I don't see the... If it's not contributing, I don't see the point in memorializing the former garage opening.

Yeah, I agree.

Javier Fernandez, address 520 Northeast, 55th Terrace, Morningside. With the architect Breger in the house, we wanted to touch base on these two items, which... I don't necessarily disagree with the staff recommendation, but as representatives of the owner, we feel that as a non-contributing house, there's not a real need to enhance the fact that there was a garage door on this specific home. We kind of did that by putting openings within this garage opening, and we've also done that I don't want to say celebrate the garage, but we've also registered this garage opening by putting a planter in where the opening was just to enhance some of that volume. And we have also done similar garage conversions within the district with the same condition that we are proposing without, and they've been approved by this board previously, so we didn't feel like that was a deal breaker.

Right. And do you have this sheet?

Yes. He was saying it was mislabeled.

Yes, we'll fix that. 525 is actually 541. Right. And I know that because I'm in 527. Between the two. So, yep.

We have this... picture of a garage conversion, which is right at the end of Fifth Avenue, right at the end of 56th Street, which has the same, I mean, very similar condition to what we're depicting. It's also a garage conversion with a planter in front. They did a very good job.

Through the chair? Yes, sir. So my one question to you is this. I don't like where outdoor lights are located because the lights being on either side of those three windows kind of indicates that there was a garage there. I'm just saying. I'm just saying. So I just... Not that I... The indent to me doesn't really matter. I mean, I appreciate the thing, but if this was a contributing property, I could understand that. But the lighting thing almost tells you that that was once a garage. So... Would tell you to move it further over or put it on the side of the house and then do another up light further over To let people know where the entrance to the house is right?

Does that make sense to you makes?

We're not trying to highlight the garage I remember that's what it makes it sound like to me I mean like you're that because it looks like that looks like that's what they would do to a garage is put lights on either side of the garage and That's, that's my only thing. And the only, there's only other one thing I think is the window upstairs, the round one. I love the fact that you're using around the big round window on the second floor. Okay. I think it just might be a little bit too big, too big. I'm just saying from a perspective, from a perspective thing, I think it just might be maybe a foot around too big. That's fair. And you, and you may, and you may want to look at that because what's, That faces to the north, is that correct? Correct. Soft light. Yeah, it faces to the north. It'll bring a lot of good light into that. Is that your stairway? Correct. That's the stairway, and that's the light in the stairway. Correct. My suggestion is look at maybe changing the perspective of that and making it a little bit smaller. Point taken.

May I make a comment?

Sorry. Yes, sir.

I just want to say that I think the design is really cool and a good job at very familiar with the neighborhood there and play tennis there a lot. And then there's all these different styles of architecture there. And I think you've done a very creative job in making a really nice composition. So that's my only comment. Thank you. Appreciate that.

Also, to comment on the window issue, as you see, if you look at the rendering, standing at the right of way, those two windows would be to the far right to the image, so it's really hard to see those windows. The reason they're not square is that the owner wanted to keep the same window design from within the room that they're inhabitating, so it was more of a decision. And that way also to differentiate a little bit between what's new and existing, which is sometimes a requirement that usually comes up with. So again, we're not strongly opposing to that, but it's a request from the owner to say that he's fine with the design as is.

Any other questions?

No, not really. I just like to compliment. I mean, second to what Chris said, I think it's a very tasteful design. You know, restrained and very good. Yeah, it's a very good design. I would like to make a motion, Mr. Chair.

Before you do, can we go back to the slide that has the conditions on it? Please. There you go. Now you may want to use that for your motion.

Well, I'd like to make a statement before we make a motion. Oh, I'm sorry.

Go ahead. If you don't mind. Yes.

Yeah, so I very much appreciate the kind of irony of the circular shape and the size and the scale. Question I have is, is the arc and that tangent, is it the same proportion as the archway at the edge of the home? Almost.

Should be a design driver. Should have used it in my presentation. That's the question.

So that's my recommendation would be to have that be the same radius and tangential shape. Almost there. Look at that. Yeah, perfect. Because that might make it just a little bit smaller, but actually be intentional, right? Yep. Thank you.

Got it.

Jordan, do you want that to be in an actual condition? Would you like it? Yeah, that would be great. Thank you. Okay. If you agree. I do.

I just want to also really commend you guys for the design. And I think this is the type of solution that I would have loved to see in the project that we saw before. The Bayside Historic District is really very thoughtful of the design and respectful. And I think that's the type of foreign non-contributing structure is really perfect as a way to go. So thank you.

Any other questions before Mr. Campbell makes a motion? Okay, Mr. Campbell.

Yes, I would like to make a motion to approve a special certificate of appropriateness for partial demolition and addition and alterations after and after the fact alterations and site improvements to the non-contributing property located at 606 NE 56th Street within the Morningside Historic District with conditions stipulated by staff except numbers 4 and 5. and an additional condition that the radius and arc of the upper round window or the framing of the upper round window match the arc and radius of the entryway arch to the front of the home.

Second. Second. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Okay, can we have a roll call, please?

Mr. Robert Powers? Yes. Mr. Christopher Colley?

Yes.

Mr. Jordan Trachtenberg? Yes. Mr. Hugh Ryan?

Yes.

Mr. Najeeb Campbell? Yes. Mr. Elvis Fuentes? Yes. Mr. Luis Espirito Muñoz?

Yes.

Dr. William Harper? Yes. Motion passes unanimously. This decision is appealable within the Hearing Boards Division within 15 days.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a nice evening. Very nice project. Okay, on to item number five.

A resolution of the Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Board pursuant to section 23-6.2 parenthesis B parenthesis 4 of the City Code of Ordinances approving or denying a special certificate of appropriateness to permit new construction of a single family structure on a vacant lot within the Spring Garden Historic District located approximately at 701 Northwest 9th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33136 further incorporating the analysis in the attached staff report entitled Exhibit A with the following findings.

Is the applicant present?

Yes.

Please give your name and address for the record.

Javier Marrera, I'm the principal of the former studio, 5555 Biscayne Boulevard.

You are the owner?

Sorry?

You are the owner?

The architect.

Is the owner present?

The owner was supposed to be here, but he sent in a power of attorney.

Okay, that was going to be my next question. So you do have a power of attorney?

He sent it in to Adrian?

Yes, they sent it in. We sent it to the awards. Okay, great.

Yep. Thank you. We'll start with the staff report.

Okay, Adrian Espinosa, Preservation Planner. Pursuant to Section 23-62B4 of the City Code of Ordinance, the applicant is requesting a special certificate of appropriateness to permit new construction and site improvements for a single-family residence at 701 Northwest 9th Avenue, the parcel zone TR3, Suburban Transit Zone.

The applicant's request to permit new construction and site improvements.

Oh, I should say that I'd like to submit the staff analysis.

Yes. As well as all the other ones.

The applicant's request to permit new construction and site improvements for a new single family residence with an historical vacant lot. Historically vacant lot is in accordance with the comprehensive plan, chapter 23 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances, Secretary of Interior Standards, and the Preservation Office Historic Design Guidelines. Staff finds that the request complies with all applicable criteria and finds that the request for a special certificate of appropriateness to permit new construction site improvements for any single family resident Over a vacant lot does not adversely affect the historic architecture or aesthetic character of the site subject to the following conditions as stipulated in subsection I, entitled, it should be G, as listed below. So a recommendation pursuant to section 23-62B4 of the City of Miami Code of Ordinances as amended and the Secretary of Interior Standards, the Preservation Office recommends approval with conditions of the special certificate of appropriateness condition one the site shall be developed in accordance with the plans as prepared by deforma studios as part of the application pz2519576 the plans are deemed as being incorporated by reference herein the a certificate to dig must be issued within the building permit portion of the project with the condition that archaeological monitoring take place during all instances of ground disturbing work. All glass visible from the right of way should be clear and or low E. At time of permitting, the applicant is to provide all manufacturer's brochures for the chosen materials. Number five, the applicant shall make clear whether the coral rock rubble pile will remain or be replaced with a structurally sound wall. And six, the resolution shall be included in the master permit set.

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

Adrian, do you want to walk them through the presentation?

Yeah. So let's, if we start off at the beginning. So that was the staff report. So this property has been vacant since at least the designation of the historic district. And so it's situated on a corner, well, It's got three different streets running alongside it. So on the far left is Northwest 9th Ave, to the south is Northwest North River Drive, and then we've got 7th Street running horizontally. There are three prominent live oak trees on the property which are being kept. Actually, 60% of the property is going to be kept as green space or open. They're going to be doing some landscape on it. We can continue on. Thank you. So this is a view facing north from, I guess, where Northwest North River Drive is and Northwest 7th Street. And to the right of that is an image of the rear of the property, but this is actually to the direct east. Here we've got the landscape plan. And here's the proposed front elevation. There will be a parking space towards the bottom that The entrance, I don't know if you wanna, I think you maybe have some. Yeah, I mean, there's also, I can go through this really quickly, but, so this is the proposed elevation, this is the rear, he's gonna go more in depth. This is some of the proposed materials, board form exposed concrete, got some flagstone for the paving, I believe. Next, and these are some of the context photos where the design drew inspiration from inside of the district. And here we have a rough estimate of the size. So, thank you. Is it through?

Okay, your turn.

Are you able to connect?

Yeah, once you connect, they should be able to switch it out in the back.

There we go.

Let's see. Let's try this. This happened last time.

He seemed to be having technical difficulties.

While he's doing that, can I ask him a couple questions? No.

We have to have members of the public speak before the board does.

Your drawings are very good. You may not even need your presentation, actually.

It's just that we've seen it.

We can't show it today, but I can answer the questions.

Okay.

Well... If we are able to get you connected, we'll come back to your presentation. Let me just ask if there's anyone in the public who wishes to speak on this item. You're not in the public. Seeing no one, now we can ask your questions.

All right, so through the chair. First off, congratulations on saving the trees that are there, because you know how I personally feel about that on this board. Especially building a new house. And I also want to thank you for your height, keeping your height similar to the houses in the area. And this is exactly what we mean doing a new build in a historic district, because this house should be of the time. And I love the wooden louvers. I think that's phenomenal. That is brilliant. And they need to use them more often. They really do. I don't care what anybody says about impact glass. It breaks. And I know it breaks. And then it takes two years to get new glass. And they don't give you new glass. They actually have to put in a whole new window. So, you know, that's a big line that sold everybody on that horseshit. But that's another story entirely. So, and I also like it because it can keep the house cool. I think because that's, when I was a kid growing up in Puerto Rico, that's what they had. They had the louvers on every window. Right. And thank you very much. But I'll let you sell the rest of the project. It looks great from here.

Yeah. You know what? I'm not going to be able to project. It doesn't look like it's working. But what we try to do with the concept of the design was preserve the trees. So the house is elevated. The entire ground floor is open air. The entrance to the house is right in the middle. There's a screened-in volume where you have a stair that brings you up to the second floor. And then that same stair brings you up to the rooftop as well. The materials, just like Adrian was showing, it's board-form concrete, most of the exterior. We do have those wood louvers on the street side, which is actually the south side. And on the back, we don't. On the back, it's mostly glass, so you have the views down to the tree canopy behind and the pool there as well. It's a very simple house, but again, the point here was to create something of the time, clean, and to preserve the trees that were there.

Are your louvers double where they can be just the bottom can be closed and the top can stay open?

No.

Or is it one whole thing?

It's one whole thing.

One whole stack.