Historic Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

It's a lot of fun to, I don't know exactly what you're doing. It's, you know, with the story I've said, it's challenging.

Yes, I'm here we got you on the on the call

All right, great.

All right, well, with that, I will call to order a Historic Preservation Board meeting Wednesday, September 16th. Roll call, please.

Ms. Percorera?

Present.

Ms. Heatley? Present. Mr. Serrano?

Present. Thank you.

We have quorum.

And we have remote... Jeffrey and Patricia.

Okay. Thank you.

Present. Great. All right. Sounds good. Order of business. We have three requests for certificate of appropriateness. Prior to that, if we have any public comments. anyone like to make any public comments no okay I do want to just note that I do have two agenda items that I would like to discuss in the board member comments in section number eight which is an update on on the person the home on 101st Street as to the status of the renovations and the requirements on the certificate of appropriateness that we can discuss later, along with a discussion of a resolution to eliminate the Historic Preservation Board relatively new fee for certificate of appropriateness. It's something that was not – there was no fee for that prior to 2022, and I believe that it is a – it is not an incentive to our historic homeowners and have a proposed resolution for the to discuss with the board and if to see if everyone is in agreement to then forward to the City Council for Village Council for their consideration So with that can we get approval on the minutes? I Asked and nobody Jeffrey has approved the minutes do I hear a second I second second all in favor Great. Aye. All right. So we move on to action item 6A, which is a request for certificate of appropriateness. The owners are David Mandel and Nina Mandel. The architect is Victor Bruce, and the address is 1291 Northeast 102nd Street. Eddie, you want to give us a summary?

Yes. Thank you. The applicants, Mr. David Mandel and Ms. Nina Mandel, are requesting a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Board, seeking improvements to the historically designated residence at 1291 Northeast 102nd Street. The property is located at 1291 Northeast 102nd Street. Constructed in 1926 during the original development of Miami Shores Shoreland Company, the residence is a representative example of the Mediterranean Revival style that is historically categorized the village's early residential development. The property was designated a local historic resource in 1984 and is recognized at the national level. The 2,354-square-foot two-story home consists of three bedrooms, three and one-half bathrooms, and has a detached two-car garage on a 15,312-square-foot lot. Overall, the proposed work will retain the properties defining historic architectural characteristics while providing compatible additions and modern residential amenities. The proposed request will also require Planning and Zoning Board unified site plan consideration for the approved additions, and the applicant proposes the following items for board consideration. A new 625 square foot living room addition. A new 133 square foot second story bathroom addition associated with bedroom number two. A 155 square foot conversion of the existing covered terrace to a lanai area. The proposed addition will utilize materials intended to be compatible with the historic character of the existing residence, which include textured stucco, wood doors, windows, and exposed wood rafters. The applicant is also proposing new artisanal barrel tile roofing material in orange finish tones proposed for the new addition. The roofing material will match the existing roof tiles in shape, style, and color to maintain visual continuity within the historic structure. And also there are proposed new aluminum doors and windows in white finish and clear glass to match the existing window and door systems. Staff request that the Historic Preservation Board recommend approval of the proposed certificate of appropriateness as located on the property at 1291 Northeast 102nd Street. And the applicant is here with their presentation and any questions you may have. Thank you.

Okay. Wonderful. Well, welcome. And I just want to first observe that it is really a really beautiful historic home. So excited to hear your presentation.

Pretty straightforward. We're adding to the east. Mainly my strategy when I'm adding something to a historic is make a gesture that is clear that whatever is getting built is not a continuation, like literal continuation of that building as if it was the original. So I'm adding what I call a neck, basically like a buffer between the addition and the existing house. In other projects that we've done here in the Shores, we do similar moves like that. There's a house on 94th Street, I think it's 431. we basically pushed the wall a little bit out so it could be clear where the original house ended and where the addition came in rather than having a smooth wall. So in the case of this addition for this living space, which is badly needed, these houses, this Spanish revival style where you have a living room that's exposed rafters on the first floor and they have four stories for the bedrooms around, The living spaces aren't that formidable and sometimes, in the case of this project, there's just not enough room for a larger family. The family that was there previously was just a couple. They were there for a long time. They bought it when the house was almost like an original house. Nothing had been done to it. I think it was maybe one or second owner. We actually work with that client. In this project, the original existing house actually has a garage addition and a breezeway connected to the rear. We worked on that. It was also by the then historical preservation board. We're following a similar strategy, proportions, exposed rafters, roof tiles, all those elements that are the same language as the existing but without attaching itself. to the existing, but just keeping it, you know, speaking the same language, pretty much. So any questions, I'm more than happy to answer.

Okay, thank you. If we kind of do these plans, does somebody want to have any questions?

So Victor, did you, looking at the plans, thanks for the desire to try and make it consistent and not impact as much of the original structure as possible, but did you consider pushing the addition, setting it back further into the garden so it isn't at the same level as the front facade of the house?

Well, it isn't. It isn't at the same, but if we push it further back, then it's going to conflict with the garage in the back. It's already a very deep setback anyways. So when you drive by, there's a very long span of sod. But we purposely, as much as we could, we didn't line it up. So they're not both at the same distance from the front property line. It's stepped back a couple feet. But it also has that break.

Not bad. It is lined up.

No, it's 10 inches and 3 quarters pushed back from the front of the house.

Ah, OK. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I see it. I see it. 10 inches.

So Victor, the part that I'm talking about is the new living room addition?

Yes.

The garage is in the middle of the lot.

If you're facing the front of the house, your addition would be to the right of the existing front facade, correct? Yes. Or the passageway being connected to the tune?

Yes. There's the addition of the living space. Then there's an open air terrace with a pergola in the back. Then there's a pool. Shifting everything like that north gets us closer to the garage.

Mm-hmm.

It's assuming that everything stays the same size, like the terrace and stuff like that, right?

Yes. Arguably, we would like to keep it the same size. We pushed as much as we could on these widths. The length is not an issue, but the width, if we're going to put furniture in that terrace, it has to have a certain width to it. The pool needs to have a certain width to it. I think, I know what you're getting at, but we have to consider that we're about 40 feet from the property line, so whatever gesture we're making, the gesture's already made by being at least the 10 inches that I'm pushing it back. It's far back from the sidewalk.

Well, I think there's several things to consider. In terms of setbacks, yes, you're right, it's 40 feet. The fact that you are just adding a one-story addition to this house is also a very, very good gesture. And You are recognized here for doing very good work, but there's something that that From what I see it, it's not continuous with the historic, it doesn't have a continuity with the historic importance. What happens is that by you doing that, you are blocking that beautiful corner that the house currently has, the window that right now will become the passage, right? This house has a very interesting volumetric because it has the garage that comes out and the main portion of the house which is pushed back and then behind that you have another wing. that you can see as well. So by continuing the volume, the new volume, completely aligned with the facade, takes away that interest. I understand that there is a need of doing the living room, that you have a nice terrace that is going to communicate with your pool. That all is going to be really, really nice. but it takes away that original character of the house. And I think that part of our job here is to try to maintain it as much as possible. I appreciate that the facade, you are working with the same type of windows. It's going to look seamless, but if you were to push it back and allow that corner to be viewed, I think the structure is going to gain much more. And I don't think you will lose space. Yes, the pool will be closer to the garage, but the garage is also beautiful. And I have seen other structures where they make the garage, they put flowers, planters. It would look really, really nice. And you still have space in the set back in the back. So there's another issue that I know that probably you're going to mention, and it's that connectivity from the breakfast room. But I was looking at the floor plan in some existing images, and maybe you could connect from the kitchen has like a coffee station or something in the back so maybe you can connect this from there and it's going to feel much more natural and you can move the cabinets. I mean interior work there's many things that you can do and they are going to look fantastic but this house is one of the few

Centennial, right? It's a shoreland property.

It's a shoreland property, centennial. You will not be losing really any quality of space, and the house will really, really be kept more in its original state. So it's more about that. It's more about... what, let me see, you know, the court ordinance calls as maintaining the architectural style, the scale and the massing, which is taken out from section 16.8-1. So that's my takeaway from it. There's a few other things that we can, you know, discuss once the rest of my colleagues can also have their vision, opinion. Do you want to say something, Patricia, or no?

I agree with Paula. I think that the fact that the property is a corner that long addition just in the front definitely would affect the corner beauty of that house. So I agree with her that finding a new way to push it back a little bit and not affecting the facade will be a fantastic project.

I think that's the issue is that this is a corner lot, but this is correct. And so when normally we look at the front facade, we're most concerned about that. But in a corner lot, we're concerned with everything that's visible from the street. And with a corner lot, we're concerned about that whole entire area. So it is very special. And if you can find a way to set that living in addition back, I think it would go a long way towards alleviating our concern about that view.

So if I may, yes, it's a corner lot, yes. So it's 102nd on the south side, front facade, side elevation is on 13th. The house is hugging the west property line. So when we consider where will the addition, where could an addition go, can go nowhere else but the east side. The south side or the north side, we worked on that garage. We worked on that connection. So we actually got a variance to be able to put the structure five feet from the property line on the north side.

Yeah, I agree. It has to be on the east side. I also don't see anything else.

Taking into consideration.

I think what we're all suggesting is pushing back that addition. of the House. I don't think there's anywhere else you can put it, as far as...

Yes, I was looking for agreement on that, so that we can work it through. We are talking about historical aspects and exterior, but as architects, we have to take into consideration the interior, so it has to be a balance between exterior and interior. This house has something specific and you recognize it. The kitchen is pushed back, the dining room is in the front. After studying which connections would work most, It's this one. It's going through that window because it's still living space. I understand we're talking about historical, but I also have to consider how does the interior work once we do this addition. To be able to get to the living room from the foyer and walk through the kitchen, it's not the way that typically happens. So even to flip the kitchen, you will always have to walk through the kitchen to be able to enter a living room. I have clients that, oh, no, I don't care if I put my bedroom off of the kitchen. You might not care now, but you're going to care later when you try to sell this house. This house will always sell. It's a beautiful house. But we took that into consideration. And yes, that corner, it's very nice because both windows are the same size. But it's kind of like one of those things. I had to negotiate with the existing house and how would that connection work with the interior. Now, one thing to consider is also you recognize the scale of the living room. The living room at the ridge is talking. It speaks to the volume of the living room on the other side, which is going to turn into a dining room. So there's a certain kind of relationship between the two of them as you take the corner. If you see the perspective, you'll see how both wings seem to be talking to each other. Similar language, but now obviously we're not doing a photocopy of one or the other. I understand what you're saying about pushing it back and it be as easy as moving it and just pushing it back and moving. But then the connection with the existing house, it's not going to work.

Well, nothing good is easy to do. But is I see what you're saying about, I know that there's a predicament of like, okay, we have to move some things from the kitchen But isn't the existing structure also very important, though? I mean, it's a balance, and you have it right. It's a balance. But I don't know if, in this case, the function is worth the...

It seems a great percentage of the house is being left untouched. So the most important space, and I don't refute the fact that that corner is pretty, but the most important space of this house is the front. That space, that arch, the tiles of the roof, that is the most important space. That's the one that has the fireplace. Even the details inside are very unique. A couple houses have that fireplace located like that, but not with the details that that house has. When you enter, having archways from the foyer to the dining, and then having that archway go through into the living space, the historic experience is also an internal one. It works. It just works. Entering the foyer and walking over that little corner, yes, it's important, but the majority of the house stays the same. That's just the best place, I think, to put that connection.

Well, if we talk about interiors, for example, I could think about something like what happens if the den becomes with a double door. I don't know if it still has the door that you're showing, but it becomes a little bit more of an area also to relax. And then you have a connection there to the corridor, and you can go back. out through that side of the kitchen, for example, then you don't have to go through the kitchen. Interior-wise, there's different things.

You can't go from the den to the kitchen because that's the landing of the stairway, and it's like seven feet.

It's too low.

It's too low. That area is really tricky. I don't know why they did that, but when you look at the closet behind the stairway, it's like this. Yes.

So Victor, I have a question. Between the breakfast room and the kitchen, are those cabinets you're showing between the two dashed lines, is that what that is?

That's a ceiling soffit.

It's what, I'm sorry?

It's a soffit to the tribute AC.

It's a soffit, okay. So right now, the entrance to the new area is from the breakfast room to, there'll be a passageway to the living room from there, is what you're suggesting. Yeah.

So the opening inside the house is still the window opening except remove the sill.

Yeah, yeah, I see that. But it's not only about the window. It's about the volumetrics of the house, what causes now instead of having this volume that is here, this one that comes out more, and the one that is in the back to continue. Now what happens is that the house, instead of doing all those changes, now it becomes mainly this by the addition. that's kind of more of the concern. So it's the volumetrics, not only the window. Of course, if it was just for a window, I don't think we would be having such a big discussion. Well, you can always reconfigure the kitchen. I mean, you don't need to lose the cabinets, but you can make that whole space in a really nice breakfast kitchen and have a nook, and from the nook, you know, pass a little bit back so that at least you have a little bit more space. I mean, that could also be a possibility, and you don't lose what you're saying, having to cross the whole kitchen to go into the new space.

No, I understand, but I think we continue walking through the kitchen to get to the living space. There's no other way of doing it. You will always go from foyer through kitchen to living room if you make the opening in the back.

Madam Chair, if I may... Yes.

Okay. If I'm looking right now at A-202, please. 202, yes. Yes. So looking at this, Victor, you see that in order to get to the living room, you have to go through the breakfast. So it's not... It's not something like ideally either, just to create from the whole living room, actual living room, a dining room, because you're going to go through the breakfast to go to the living room to the other side. So it's not like... either like an ideal flow of the house. You don't go to the kitchen and breakfast to go to the living room. So I agree with what Paula said, that maybe instead of pushing that living room, just stay, make it bigger, maybe co-joining the actual living room with the lanai and work around the breakfast area to make the actual dining room. So it's just an idea because looking at the floor plans, you see that guests have to go enter the house and they have to go to the breakfast in the kitchen to go to the living room.

They don't go through the kitchen though.

No, but you see it because it's open. You still go through it. I mean, maybe that's what I'm saying. Maybe it doesn't have to be all the way in the back. but you reconfigure a little bit the kitchen and we can move at least this new volume a little bit back. How much? There's different ways.

You're asking to protect the window in the corner, move everything back to protect that window pretty much?

Well, not necessarily only the window, but to maintain the break in the volume. The 10 inches is not enough to maintain that break. So in other words, you're putting a new structure. Instead of the volume becoming this, you still have it like that, pushed. I mean, that's from the volumetric point of view, not only the window.

I think you could even set it back. You could even keep the same entrance going into the breakfast room, but instead of going straight into the living room, people would go left and then into the living room where those bushes are.

In actuality, I can move the living room because we're talking about volumetrics, not the window. I can move the living room north. I can even adjust the neck and make it narrower And that way, if I make it narrower, the neck meaning the space between the breakfast and the living room, that could be narrower. I can move the living room north. Most likely, that could move about three feet, maybe three and a half feet. But I need to stay strong with, I can't agree that it will work walking through the kitchen. So I can adjust it, but still maintain the foyer, breakfast. Because I call it breakfast. I don't know, but it's still open. There's no change in finish on the floor either because they have a black and white tiling in the kitchen, and it's not in that area. That area is wood. So that area wants to continue being wood. So I can do that. I can make the neck narrower, then move the living room structure at least three feet, and that way we have the corner, but then not the window.

Okay.

The window would still be our opening, but even the opening could be a little bit smaller. Anything that I can make squeezing, then allowing me to move the living room, then I can shift everything north and then get you that corner.

Jeffrey, is three feet enough? What do you think?

I'm sorry, you're asking me?

Yes, is three feet enough? Like if we were to send...

I don't think three feet would make a difference to protect the facade at all. Three feet is nothing.

Yeah, but it still differentiates it significantly from the other buildings. So, I mean, it's starting to get to where we need to be. Three and a half feet. Is there any way you can get more than three feet from there?

Four.

Four feet?

I think I can get four.

He thinks he can get four.

Yeah. I mean, I think then you're starting to, like... Make a big distinction. You're starting to, yeah, you're starting to preserve that view and... and, you know, differentiate what's new and what's old.

Jeffrey just mentioned something. I'm looking at the plan. Jeffrey just mentioned something. What happens if you go through the corridor, but instead of, like, entering direct, you kind of, like, turn a little bit? Like, see the space that you have there in between the two buildings? You pass, and then you turn a little bit and go into the living room. That way... That way you can push it even a little bit more. Yeah, exactly. I think Victor can definitely figure it out.

By squeezing the hallway. If I squeeze the hallway, now my southern face is more to the north. I can shift the entire structure north. I just don't think you want another corner. So if I'm going to go east and then north, that's a second corner we don't want to have. We don't want to have a southeast corner to compete with the existing southeast corner. If I squeeze it, I move up, and then I can get you that corner of the existing house and then have this other surface just go into the neck and then hit the east side of it. I know what you're trying to say, but I don't think I should go like this and then like that because that's a new corner that we don't want to compete with the existing.

Let me see.

A new southeast corner.

But you're going to have a new corner no matter what, right?

Well, you'll have a northeast corner further back facing 113th Avenue, but that's inevitable. Any addition that we make is always going to have a southeast corner, but not adding an intermediate one. I think one closer to the existing corner might be competing.

Can I show you something?

Sure.

I don't know. I mean, having the new corner on the east side doesn't bother me because no matter what, this new addition is going to create a new corner, right? If I'm understanding you correctly. So it's not really an issue for me that you're creating a new corner.

Yeah, Jeffrey, it's like turning it 90 degrees.

So see where this line is? Like if somehow we could, that's why he was saying come in like this and then go like that and enter. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Like that.

But I think we would be defeating the purpose of not competing with this corner if I give it another corner. If I can move everything north and go up, the kitchen is going to have to be affected. according to this. Renovate the kitchen? Yeah. The kitchen's pretty new.

It's either that or... Well, you can also shift some of the cabinets. I mean, you don't need to renovate the whole kitchen. You can probably shift some of the cabinets.

Yeah, there's some work.

Why would you have to modify the kitchen if you're creating an entrance? You're just basically, instead of entering straight through from the breakfast room to the living room, you're just kind of making a left and you're going in through that, whatever that is, that passageway or walkway that you're having through the kitchen in the new addition.

Oh, I see what you're saying. But you're still in the corner here.

Yeah, then you don't even have to touch the kitchen at all, really.

No, but then he has a corner. He's right about it.

You're right about it. Basically, that neck is trying to be neutral. I'm trying to make that, and you'll see it in the next project, that neck is trying to remain neutral. Let one structure be itself. Also, how do we connect two, because it's going to be texture stucco, but it's not going to be a photocopy of the existing. It's going to have some, but we're not going to imitate it because there's no way to imitate that. To have a clear distinction between one and the other through an element like that you don't want that element to then be a corner, right? Because then if you do that, then you have a little hallway, you have a little zigzag. I truly think, and I'm trying to meet you halfway, but I truly think if we can keep that like that and I'll push everything as much as I can north without creating a corner, I think that should be...

I agree with you. You shouldn't create the corner, but it does need to be pushed back enough so that you can still understand a corner because if not, why do we know that effort at the same time, right? It does have to show that that corner of the property.

I'm going to have to shift the opening on the masonry of that wall. So I'm going to have to shift that opening where the window used to be. I'm going to have to make the opening more to the north and then squeeze it. And as I squeeze it, moving it north and squeezing it will give me the move on the living room to move north. And you'll get your corner. Not only will you get your corner, but you'll get a better distinction of those little wing walls that these historical houses have, these Spanish revival houses. There's a little bit of a wing wall there. That's going to even read better.

And there's a nice gate there as well, right? There's like a gate. Well, there's a – There's the regular gate, but it doesn't have – like at the end, it has like a nice raw iron gate.

No, not with the house. From that side, there's no access. The access is from the rear.

Let me see. Let me see the pictures on the –

So Victor, you think you can get at least four feet then to the north?

If I can get more, I'll get more. But I think we're getting pulled from different directions. And now you have kind of like an idea of what happens when we sit down and we start sketching and we see this. I call it negotiation with a house, and you know how it was with your house. We needed to negotiate.

I absolutely do.

It's a constant negotiation, and I think we can do this. I think we can move it at least four feet. If I get four and a half, I'll get four and a half. There's nothing that keeps me from doing that, except, yeah, I'm going to have to adjust some things next to the garage, but it'll be it.

I think what I'd like to just add is that I think the board's comments are pretty much solidified. I think they just want to maintain that the prominent feature that's existing there, the historic feature, is the most prominent element. And I think we don't want to be too rigid with the designer because we do want to give him a little bit of flexibility in how he achieves his clients' desires, but also the historic character of what we're trying to maintain. So I feel like we are at a pretty good point, and I think he understands what the board's goal is at this point.

If you look at sheet 402, A402, elevation 2, you'll see the east side, you'll see the addition in front of the existing, that won't line up like that. It'll be pushed over. And that way you see the corner. And you'll see at least four feet. So that side will read in the manner that you guys are seeking.

To me, that sounds like a good compromise.

I appreciate you presenting the certificate of appropriateness and I certainly understand the programming needs for the Mandel family to have a living room for a larger family but I too am wrestling and I agree with the board that Because of its historic nature, it's a National Register of Historic Homes as well. As presented here, I'm not in agreement with the addition. And I know there's been recommendations made. I don't have any recommendations to make, but as presented, do not agree.

I mean, I think if I can summarize,

Yes. So I have a few more comments. They're minor in nature from what we were just discussing. More questions, actually. Victor, the new windows that you're proposing on the living room, the idea is they're going to match the two bay of windows that are next to the door, correct?

Okay The same thing for the roof and all the roof elements are they going to match the existing I

Yes, we're using not the tile, but I'm talking about the rafters.

Well, we're doing exposed rafters. So this is going to be taking into consideration the existing main space on the first floor. So we're doing the same thing. We're exposing the rafters inside the space.

OK. You mentioned the stucco will be different because it's very difficult to match it exactly to the same. Stucco?

That's what's, I've been in front of this board about three times before, and the previous boards never wanted us to imitate the stucco perfectly. I don't know if that's changed, but knowing that from before, my intention was not to then, to basically do a textured stucco, I mean, We can show you a sample before we do, and that's something that we were asked about before. It's not gonna be knocked down. No way.

It cannot be a flat, modern stucco either. Remember what happened with the house in 96.

It's going to be texture.

It's a texture stucco, but not the very kind of what I would describe as thick original.

I don't think anybody knows how to do that anymore.

Right, yeah. That is something we have discussed in the past. And you also kind of want to continue with the distinction of the original versus the edition.

Yeah. OK. Yeah, and then we have the new doors on the back. They're going to match the existing door that you have. I know, Patricia, hold on. Give me a second. The doors in the back, they will match with the mountains. And then, Patricia, go ahead about the other door. You were going to say something?

Yes, taking the opportunity, the house came to the board. There's something really important that happened to that house. And the previous owners changed the front original door for a glass door. So this is completely non-appropriate for the house. And a modern glass door, rectangular, not even arched. our top door has to be replaced. To get, you know, to the whole harmonious historic, what we're doing right now, the door needs to be replaced and just put it back as it was originally, like a wooden door with an art top. We have pictures of the previous doors. So this is something that is an eyesore for this beautiful historic house.

That's a recommendation?

Well, it's actually, this is a historic designated home, and if we have to go again with the code, the code says that everything has to maintain as the original.

So applying that retroactively?

Usually that happens in these type of cases.

Eddie, do you have a way to do on that?

Well, I think you make the request, and it's up to the applicant to proffer it if they decide to obviously incorporate that into their design.

Let's read again the code.

Which code are you reading from, Paula? The historic preservation code?

or the planning and zoning code. No, let me see. Miami-Dade County Historic 16.28.11. Okay. Okay, so let's see.

So application for certificate of appropriateness. Architectural features shall include but not be limited to the architectural style, scale, massing, siding, general design, the color of the exterior paint surfaces, and general arrangement of the exterior of the building or structure, including the type, style, and color of roofs as well, windows, doors, and apprentices, if I said it correctly.

Are we still talking about the door?

Yeah. I think we recognize that that was already modified. Somehow it got modified. It shouldn't have. It should have come before the board. And we probably would never have approved that glass door in front of that house. But it didn't.

No, he's talking. No?

No. Jeffrey, I think we lost you.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yeah, we lost you at the very end.

Oh, you lost it? Okay. So, you know, we recognize that the new owners did not make that change. Somehow it was made by the previous owners without getting approval, and it slipped through the cracks, which is, it is what it is. But that glass door is really just not appropriate to the house. And if there was a way to get that changed while you're making all these other modifications, I think that would be great and would really go a long way to making that house look like it did originally. And I don't know if it was around an arched house. I don't necessarily have a problem with a rectangle door. There are historic houses with rectangle doors, so I'm not sure what the original looked like. But, you know, we could even keep...

Yes, we have pictures. What's that? We have pictures of the original. Yes, we do. In black and white, yes.

Okay. But since this was done previously and... I'm thinking we can try and keep the structure there that's there, but replace it with a wood door that looks like it's from the 1920s. So they try to minimize the work that they would have to go through. If right now it's a rectangle frame and requesting an arched frame and an arched door, that would be very expensive, I think, to do. But keeping the rectangle frame and maybe using a style that's consistent with the 1920s, that might not be so expensive and would get us the look that we're looking for.

Is the door rectangle? It kind of looks like there is a probably... Yeah, they put a transom.

Most likely they put a transom because to put a door like that, I don't think they even make it. Not if it's aluminum and glass. But in case that is the way that they have to go, I just want to make sure. Are you saying to have it look like wood? Because if it's a wood door... It's not gonna work with code, so we're gonna have to put something to protect it. That means that you're gonna see bolts on the sides. I don't think we're gonna put shutters, but we'll have to put some type of hole to be able to put one of those screens because if it's wood, there's no way that's not gonna get impact. Now, if it could look like wood, could be resin or something, then we could do something impact. And I can't speak for them if they're gonna do it or not, but I wanna make sure that if they do do it, that you're okay with something that looks like wood. Just like the garage doors. The garage doors aren't wood, but they look like wood.

Because the wood door is no longer in code.

There's no NOA for a wood door? I don't think so. When we do the modern ones, they're a huge pivot.

Those doors are engineered. That's way different than what this would be.

I think if we get something that looks like wood, I mean, we've got a long way towards creating a good-looking house. Even if it's just wood looking like, or something that looks like wood, I think would be okay, in my opinion.

Yeah, it wouldn't have any kind of pattern or anything. We wouldn't want to do like porcelain tile that looks like wood. That's not what we would look. We would look for something that looks like wood and nothing else.

Yeah, I mean, we trust your... We trust, that's for sure. I mean, we know that it's not going to be something... Weird. In regards to the door, I know that this was not caused by the current owner. I know, like what Jeffrey's saying, it kind of probably fell to the cracks. And we all that have been in this position, Victor, understand that a lot of times there's a lot of things that we have to rectify that were not of our doing. And, you know, as owners and as architects, and it's not nice, but... So my plea about that is think that you're doing a good thing. Think that this replacement is really going to create value to the historic nature of our neighborhood. So it's like a gift. And in a certain way, it's not really a request because actually we are complied here as a board to make sure that these things get done and get done in compliance with the code. And that's what the code calls for. So we do need to do it. Also in regards to the windows and doors, Victor, let's make sure, I read your note that says that the windows are gonna match, they're gonna be white. But let's make sure that they match in terms also of the size. as well, no? The size, everything that is very consistent, the size of the mountains and the size of the bottom part of the window. I notice in the elevation that they don't match in height. Is it because of a specific situation with the height of the floor or just a matter of drawing?

Well, I'm putting furniture up against it. I don't know if you want to have the sill be at the same height, but the great thing is I drew the house, so I'm using my old drawings to draw the addition. Basically, the windows that we're putting are the windows that I have, but I do have them higher because the window in the breakfast is lower. It's like 30 inches or even less than that. I need to put furniture and stuff, so I raised them.

Okay, okay this I Understand that And In terms of the stocko, I think that because the house has the same look You're doing the addition to pretty much look as the same as you had before which is really nice because it's gonna be seamless Try to get that stock as close as possible to I think that that will be better than doing a completely different stucco work just because of maintaining the style, not because of a preference, just to maintain the style.

Yeah, that's my understanding of how we do it. It has to be like an interpretation of that, but not a creation that's...

It should be distinct. It should be the characteristics of the stucco, but which is... textured, but not an exact copy of the 100-year-old stucco, which is extremely difficult to do today. And also, we want to make somewhat of a distinction between the new and the old.

Well, I think in this case, what we're trying to do is to make it look exactly the same. If we wanted to do something different, then it would be like a flat stucco, but I know that there's differences here about that.

It should be within the same characteristics, not flat, but not exactly the same either.

Smooth stucco would look strange.

Horrible. Yeah, it would look horrible, and no one is saying that. What we're saying is keeping the characteristics of the home that are... No, but we can get pretty close I mean if it's if it's in between the texture The overall look and feel of the historic home but

Yeah, I've always, with the houses that we've done, I've always thought that unlike addition to a 1960s or a 1950s where the clients go, I want it to look exactly the same. And we've gotten away with it where you come in and go, oh, the architect who did this in the 50s did all this. Ha ha, no, he didn't. Or she didn't. In this case, my belief is that I don't want anybody to look at this house and go, oh, this house was built like this. I don't think that's the point. This wasn't built with that. It talks to it, but it can't be a photocopy. I don't think we want to do that.

That's within the guidelines of the historic preservation.

That's always been my understanding. We make some moves so that it's clear to even the naked eye that they weren't built together.

That's always been the guiding principle.

Anything you add to it should

to be significant, it could be very subtle. We did something subtle with the garage itself. There's no flat roof in this house, but with the garage, we did a flat roof because we wanted to get a little bit of the break in the roofs. That worked differently because it was square. This being more of a wing, it's a little different. Again, negotiation. I just think of it as a negotiation with the existing.

Yeah, I mean, there's different ways of skinning a cat. It all depends on how you tackle it. However, in this case, like, it's so similar that I would think that it's better just to keep it very similar. And to that point, one last thing, the connector, the connector in between the two, you have a window that is completely different, that is, like, big. Why don't we... maybe consider working the same type of windows that you already have in the rest of the house. Or in that case, maybe if you want to do something, if the intention, architecturally speaking, was doing something completely different, maybe it's just all glass or, I don't know, like something is either completely different or kind of feel the same way.

It wants to be, I think it wants to be completely different. Oh, cool.

Okay, so in that case... Yeah, no mutton, just glass. Just like something, like almost like a glass box, maybe even something that goes all the way to the floor. Something that is a little bit more, that it feels that you're like... I can go further down. Breaking that.

But it should be within the same look and feel, right?

Like it shouldn't look like a complete... Well, if you painted the same color, the frame will be the same color. But again, naked eye... there's that little break, and it's gonna get pushed back even more, so it's gonna be even more insignificant than it is now.

It has to be one, in my opinion, Michelle, it has to be one or the other, or you make it that people don't even see the difference, like what Victor was saying about that mid-century, which I think is what he's trying to do here, or you do something completely different. That element is completely different, because he's even doing a flat roof there. On the other project that you have, then that's super seamless, and I understood that as a...

It's more complicated than that one. I just didn't want this... to be attached so you you are we were we're talking about respecting the existing volume and getting the corner if i had put this right off to it right then it's no it would have been yeah yeah no no that yeah okay from a visual perspective that would have been my preference but i get that that's not what we want

Referring to the step back or?

No, the passageway, like eliminating the passageway and connecting it directly to the house. That's what I think would have looked better. But that's just from a look perspective and not necessarily from a preservation perspective.

Well, the thing is, if we did that, then we took the window on the second floor out. Right now, we're only taking the window out of the breakfast. Yeah, that would have looked funky.

I agree. What about the roof? What's the proposal for the roof?

For which one?

For the tiles that you're going to put in the new structure.

This is the tile that was used in the original house. It's handmade, artefacto, artesano. Artesanos. Yeah, we're going with that.

So you're going to continue the same one? Yeah. Perfect. Excellent. It's impossible not to do it. Excellent. Okay, perfect.

So, Victor, are you saying that house has the original tile, or are you saying race style?

That, well this, I don't think, this could be an original style because this is handmade and I'm sure that when that house was done.

100 years ago.

But that house, no, that's a new roof. It's a new roof as of 2011. It is a new roof.

Yeah, yeah, so it's not the original style.

No, no.

Yeah, it's not the original style.

Yeah, and I remember working with Manny and I remember telling him, because he needed to put a new roof. The house needed a new roof, but he went with that. Yeah. And it worked great. Yeah. It looks really, I mean, it makes... It's like the hat. It looks good.

Exactly, and the dimension.

It's just making it consistent with the existing tile is right. So this is the clay tile, and it's consistent with it. That would be great.

Yeah, we reached out to the original manufacturer, and they're still in business. So they wanted to come by, but they couldn't make it. They had to go to Coral Gables, but they dropped off a couple of tiles in the house.

Great.

Yeah. Good.

If there aren't any other comments, I'd like to summarize, unless there's something else.

Yeah, one point of clarification. Victor, the new aluminum doors and windows, was that front door part of that scope?

No, we're not changing. We're not touching the existing house when it comes to the front facade.

Okay, got it. No other questions?

Except for the request for name.

That is a glass door, but it's not part of this certificate of appropriateness.

We're not talking to a door. It's like a dark bronze and dark glass.

Yeah, but we're going to change it.

Eddie.

Eddie, please.

Summarize? Yes. Okay. So based on the comments that have been made tonight, what we have here is that the project architect is going to work with the property owner, and they're going to reassess the site arrangements, specifically with the new living space, the 625 square feet. They're going to explore pushing it further to the north, At minimum four feet, if they can get more, then they'll assess that and see if it's feasibly adequate to do so. The whole idea is to preserve the principal structure of the home. In tandem to that, they're going to reassess the drawings and ensure that the stucco texture is going to be as close as possible on the new wing to match the existing wing of the home. Also on that theme, the connector windows between the new addition and the existing home, we're going to move towards the different types of window setup. Otherwise, it would be exactly to match what's in place. And then with the existing. Yes.

I would like my colleagues please to reconsider it. I think four feet is nothing. it will block the facade equally. So it will not make the corner facade will be lost. That we know. But at least it's not going to be like a whole block. So I consider myself and I put on the table to my colleagues to reconsider there has to be push farther than only four feet, please.

For me, pushing it

to restore the corner view that we wanted. From my perspective, a minimum of four feet I think is sufficient.

If you can get more, that's fine. But I disagree that whatever we can do to push it back is great, but I just want a minimum of four feet. I think that's good.

I think Patricia, we kind of looked at a lot of different options, and it seems like really this is kind of a compromise. And I think that Victor mentioned maybe 4 and 1 half feet, but a minimum of 4 feet I think would help make that distinction that we are looking for.

also like to add that um based on these comments i do believe that this needs to come back to the board like you guys need to see this once more so if that gives you a little bit more relief that you're going to be able to see um the redesign once it comes back also um to what eddie said let's allow the architect to also look at this and analyze it um i'm sure that the exercise of a

The exercise of thinking about how this is going to look in that judgment will be a good call from Victor. So let's just allow him to do that. And if you can get more, you would know. You're going to know if it works or if it doesn't work also from the volumetrics. At this point, it's going to be moved. So if it's going to be moved, there's going to be changes in the kitchen no matter what. So if you see that four feet is not enough and you need to do five feet, I'm sure he will take that decision seriously.

One thing to also consider, I will push as much as I can, but we can't get the window back. So what you're looking for, you're going to get some of it, but unfortunately you're not going to get everything. So we're meeting halfway. If I push it back, the window can't come back. The window upstairs can stay. That's what I'm trying to do with the second floor window. But the first floor window can't. That's the entrance. And just to give you an idea, I'm going to get a little sentimental. This is one of my first projects in Miami Shores. And I still remember the day that I was measuring this house. The client was there for a little bit. My daughters are 27 and 23. There were four and seven running around the yard when this house was like nothing. This house was always painted white. We used to call it the White House. And I remember working on this house. So... You have no idea how much I love this house. And I know we're trying to defend it. I'm a citizen just like you guys are. You have absolutely no idea how I love this house already. So everything that I've done with the new client, the new owner, it's taking them there as well. They love the house as well. They appreciate the historical character of it. But that addition that we did in the back, I love it, I think we did pretty good. The client was very happy. But know that I appreciate what you're doing, but I love this house more than, now you know. But that's where I'm coming from with this house.

And we appreciate all the work. We obviously know this is a lot of work for both you and the homeowners, and we certainly recognize that and appreciate it. You're an expert, and especially about this house, so I think you understand. the biggest concerns. And it would be great if you could work a little bit more and come back and show us your recommendations.

Yes. Thank you. I appreciate it.

If I may, I make a motion to table item 6A for further discussion.

I second that.

Is it a table, Eddie, or is it coming back? That's a table. OK. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Eddie, I made a couple notes here in regards to the facade. Is that something I give it to you? Yeah, you can send it to us.

I'll share it with the applicant.

Just about what we discussed, that the new windows and doors shall match more than just in color. New windows and doors have a condition make sure that there are rough openings, the thickness of the new walls in reference to the windows match to the existing of the home, that also the side jams, the head jams, like the mountains, everything match. But from what you said, you already had done that first part, so you know exactly...

Well, I can tell you what we did if you want to. This is a little trivia. Well, not trivia, but those casement windows were this narrow. So you have four of them, and they all operated separately with a little crank. Like, super cool. But you can't impact, right? Right. We can't keep windows like that. So what we did with the existing house, casement windows are not made like that because they're so fat that you get no glass. So what we did is we took the look of two of them, put them together in one casement. So when you look at the house, it's exactly the same way it was when it was originally built. You see four of them. but only two operate. We put all the muttons. We worked with, I think it was, I don't think it, actually, I don't think that company's there anymore. We had them match the mutton in profile. We also had them make the frame of the casement in the part of the casement that doesn't operate. So you see the house now, you think it's four casement windows. It isn't, it's two, but they look like four.

Perfect.

And I was like, when we got that done, I was like, I was walking tall. I was walking tall because we got the vendor to be able to match it. It was awesome. That's an excellent solution.

Yes. And the thickness of that stock, the thickness of the window, I don't have a close-up, but I imagine it has some depth where the window sits in comparison to the...

It's 8-inch masonry. It's not like the house on 92nd where it was clay tile. No, it's just a normal. It's masonry, yeah.

Okay. Because that also makes a difference.

Yeah, because it does that little, yeah.

It creates a much interesting, when the house already has it, to continue with it, of course.

No, the walls are pretty much standard when it comes to the block.

Okay, yeah. And then the details of the roof.

Yeah, the rafter edge will match. It's very simple. It doesn't have any curl or anything like that.

Okay. Thank you At this point we're at item 6b HP 2680 address 353 Northeast 91st Street

The applicant, Mr. Aaron Salen and Ms. Jessica Salen, are requesting a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Board for improvements to the historically designated residence at 353 Northeast 91st Street. The property is a two-story Mediterranean Revival style residence constructed in 1928. During the original development of Miami Shores by the Shoreline Company, the residence is a representative example of the Mediterranean Revival style that characterized the village's early residential development. The property is a locally designated historic resource and is recognized at the national level. The 3,407-square-foot two-story home consists of three bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a detached one-car garage on a 6,000-square-foot lot. According to the Florida Master Site file, the residence retains significant architectural features characteristic of the Mediterranean Revival style. Overall, the proposed work will retain the property's defining historic architectural characteristics while providing a compatible addition and modern residential amenities. The proposed request will also require planning and zoning board unified site plan consideration. At this time, the applicant is proposing the following for board consideration. A new 819-square-foot one-story addition comprised of a main bath bedroom suite with porch area. The proposed addition will utilize materials intended to be compatible with the historic character of the existing residence, which includes ceramic barrel tile roof, textured stucco wood doors and windows, and exposed wood rafters. New brass steel barrel tile roofing material in the terracotta finish featuring orange and red tones is also proposed for the new addition. The roofing material will match the existing roof tiles in shape, style, and color to maintain visual continuity with the historic structure. Lastly, new aluminum doors and windows in dark bronze finish and clear glass to match the existing systems. Staff is requesting the Historic Preservation Board recommend approval of the proposed certificate of appropriateness, and the applicant is here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.

If I may, one. The existing house has three doors, the double doors with the design. The existing house has three pairs of doors. What we will be doing is relocating one of them to exiting

Is that in the plans?

What you're saying?

I don't think those are original features.

It has some flowery details.

It's very pretty, and it looks like it could be original, but I don't think it is.

But it's beautiful.

We're removing one.

You're removing one flower?

No, we're removing one set because we're renovating the kitchen. We're reconfiguring. It's a growing family.

But that's not here?

Well, it's in the interior, but you guys don't review the interior.

Yeah, I don't.

So I'm thinking of taking that door and putting it where I have a double door so it wouldn't be a bronze door. But everything else would match the house.

I am sorry. Where is this at? I'm sorry. I'm confused.

The door is on the west side of the house, not where the addition is going to happen.

OK. And the elevation on the sheet is at the entrance, right? You said it's at the main entrance?

Actually, I didn't update that elevation.

Let's see.

Yeah, I have the existing elevation there. I didn't take that window, that door out. This one.

Oh, yeah, because we do need it to be taken out.

Yeah, because we're reconfiguring the kitchen. So the drawing A402, drawing 1A402, that door will have... A402? A402, yes. 1A402, that door will be relocated.

Ah, OK, the glass door, like the French type door with the two.

It's like a French door, but it has really pretty flowery pattern design.

Oh, so it's original, though.

It's not original. We're talking about the side west elevation?

There used to be a window there, I think.

Okay. Drawing one. And it's that, the door with the steps?

Yes, yes, that one.

Okay, gotcha.

But I don't think you have a picture of that. Is there a picture of it or no?

We're not introducing it, we're just relocating it.

Ah, okay. You're moving it from there a little bit to one side or the other.

Yeah, we're moving it from the west side to the addition. The double door, because I heard him say bronze doors. To here?

Oh, no, I didn't know that.

Yeah. So we have an existing, and we're going to relocate it so that when you come out of the bedroom, that door will be matching the courtyard doors. So right now, the house is an interesting layout because it's too far from the west side. Most houses kind of hug the setback. So they have a space on the west side. And it kind of works, but it doesn't work as well as the pool side. So we are growing to the east so that they have access to the pool, a bedroom that they need, growing family as well. That door exiting to the west didn't do much and they needed a better kitchen. We redesigned the kitchen in the interior. That door will be relocated. We're keeping a door but using it for exiting the bedroom. Now when you're at the pool, you can look west. There's two doors that look the same. You can look south coming out of the bedroom. It'll be the same door. I only bring it up because I heard bronze doors and there was a disconnect in how I wrote that. We're reusing a door that's part of the house.

Let me see that elevation again. This is the west elevation, side west. Side west. I was thinking here so that they match.

Yeah, but those are .

So I'm not sure, is this part of what we're approving today or is this something else?

Well, if you can see it from the street, I don't think you can.

The neighbors.

Yeah, and actually, we're talking, we needed to reconsider that. I will be reusing the double doors on the west in the project, but it might not be in the addition. It might be in the existing house because there's two doors facing east out into the covered terrace. We're looking at sheet 8202. We are reusing a set of double doors. The set of double doors on the west side will be reused on the east side, but not in the addition. I'm mistaken on what I was saying. But we will be reusing it. I guess the intent of reusing something remains.

So you have the double doors of the breakfast area...

which don't exist right now. We have the double doors in the dining room, which do exist. The double doors in the breakfast will match the dining room doors.

You're going to take it from the kitchen?

Yes.

And put it next to it.

Yeah. So when you're in the covered terrace, you're looking west, you'll see both doors.

Well, yeah, they should look the same. Yeah. Yeah, yeah.

That makes sense. The client knows more about the parking lot.

Of course, right?

They live it.

All right, so.

We are pushing the building back, the addition back. We are respecting the low wall that's in front of it.

Which is beautiful, that low wall is beautiful.

Yeah, that's one of the first things I was told that we wanted to keep. This is where we wanted the other house.

Yeah, but there's no wall there.

It's a little bit different.

You did it here.

This one is actually – this house, I guess it's a different type of architecture compared to the one on the corner over there. This one, I see it a little bit more – like it's a little bit more sensitive in its detailing. Even the entrance is like on a chamfered corner. So this house is a little bit more – I don't want to sound sexual. I mean, not sexual, but sexist. It's a lot more feminine, I think. The White House over there, but this one has a little bit more femininity to it. It just has really soft details. So pushing it back, and then however it touches the house, I'm trying to do my best to not change too much of the living area. It's a different sloped roof. We are imitating a little bit of the unevenness on the rear of the house. One of the sides of the roof is longer than the other, so I'm doing that on the ends. But on the front, we're kind of talking about gable with the second floor gable. But again, I want to make these additions secondary to the main house. Same thing with the Mandela residence. I don't want it to compete so much. I think what we did with the other one, pushing it back, I think that's great. Here, we did it all right.

Yep, that's great. This is a lovely, lovely house.

It's just so beautiful. It is an amazing house. I have a couple of comments. In this case, because the connection... is very smooth like it almost feels like it's no it was there since ever um probably the the windows should kind of be the same um and then the new windows on the new part uh Of the addition I see them a little bit different and at least in the elevation I see them that is there a little bit different and again the height I guess it's also furniture but in this case, I think is Probably will be worth keeping it at the same height in exactly the same Yes Because it's going to feel like it's been there forever like it you're not gonna notice So much of a difference. I think that that will be a good a good, you know small change that I can make it look seamless. And then on the patio, this is just a suggestion because you cannot see it from the street. But on one side, you have the colonnade. It looks like it's existing, that colonnade. But on the other side, you only have one column. Maybe it would be nice to add at least another one so that they kind of feel there.

We can marry it to the corner of the wall. That way there's some symmetry to it.

Yeah. I know that that is a suggestion.

The intent was for doing that, for the eye to do that. But yeah, definitely another column will work, will help it.

Other than that, anybody has a comment about the roof tiles?

I think, again, if they're clay, I mean ceramic, I mean clay, I'm sorry, and consistent with the existing, I'm fine with it.

Can we see them?

Over the existing patio, there was... Probably not. So we wanted to make it the same as the rest of the house, so we just used these. These were the ones that we could find that matched the rest of the house.

This would be the closest roof to the addition. The roof over the terrace is work that was done after. This house didn't have it four times.

I think it's all these.

It's even. It doesn't have a range of color either. So this roof is going to be close proximity to the addition, and it'll be the same.

Is that clay?

I do have a question.

Go ahead, Patricia.

Paula, I don't know the roof. I haven't checked lately the roof of the house. Is that a matching roof tile like the roof of the house?

Well, the problem that I see with this house is that they changed the roof. At one point, the roof was changed. It's definitely not for sure. It was not what it was before. Because if this tile that they're showing right now is matching the existing, this is a tile that has like a sheen to it. And it's prefabricated. And we know that these houses were not built that way.

um in sheet 101.1 you can see a picture of the terrace that was roof that has double columns and if you zoom in you can see that both edge profiles are the same on my existing second floor and then the terrace down below so we will be matching that look

Yeah, because it looks like, I don't know why, there's also like some tile missing and then it was replaced by something extremely shiny. I don't know, there's like two tiles there that are super shiny. What is that?

Did they say Saint She?

No, this is a picture that I went and looked around. I went and took pictures of each of the projects.

Oh, okay. Yeah, that's broken.

But I don't know what the hell. No, but next to it, there's two super shiny tiles. Like, I don't know what happened there. I don't either. But that should be replaced. I mean, at least do whatever you have there. So, yeah, that's the problem, Patricia, that this house, I mean, for sure, the tile that is there is not the tile that was original, and it does not look... I like the original, but it is clay, what they're showing here. It's just that it's machine-made, but the rest of the house already has this tile.

Would the owners consider to start restoring the original tile, starting with this addition, and eventually in the future just do it with the roof?

So basically putting in the artesanos one?

Well, that's changing a door in another project. That's doable for changing a roof.

No, no, no. The new part.

Why don't, you know, it's like just a recommendation to start over with this addition. taking the original barrel tile and eventually in the future, just replace the roof again, but not now, but at least they don't have to do it all over again. So the new part, the new part. yes do that do it with the with something that is more appropriate exactly and then when the time comes to change the whole exactly so yes so just to get the the restoration appropriate that the house deserves and it will make the house more valuable anyhow yeah but it's only going to be the new edition is that what you're saying just in the new edition jeffrey

Patricia is suggesting that in the new addition start there and then within time at least you make a step forward. Exactly.

To the past, to the story of the house, to the original architecture. Yes, Jeffrey. So I think that if they put a clay tile roof that matches what's existing, you realize what it costs to replace the tile roof on one of these houses.

But I do because I got an estimate.

And it's astronomical. Let me just say it's astronomical.

Jeffrey, but she's buying new. I mean, nobody's asking to change the whole roof. She's going to, the client is going to have to, the owners are going to have to buy new

Roof tile. That's what Jeffrey's saying. It's significantly more. Is it? I don't know.

Not only is it hard to make and expensive, but this will break. maybe 10% of the time. So the amount of waste is going to be much greater than this other one.

How about the one that is machine-made, mixing between machine-made and... Because Artesanos has one that is machine, and they do like a mix of machine and clay. And Artesanos has one that is very, very strong. I mean, there's... You're probably more...

I understand the intent of what Patricia is saying, but this is a lot of, like, ifs for the future. If we're matching the existing and the existing is in great condition, It sounds like, and I understand the point, but it sounds like a hardship to the owner and maybe to the new owner to know that they would have to replace a roof that is that much costly. Significantly more expensive. Significantly, yeah. And really, we're matching the existing, and that's what we kind of want.

And it's clay. It's 100% clay.

Yeah, it's color through, like, when research requires.

Yeah, which is the priority. So, I mean, I agree with Jeffrey that, you know, that is... significantly more, and if we're matching the existing foam, I think, in clay, that works. Daniel?

Yeah, I agree.

How about the color? Can I see it again? It's really like a terracotta color.

It's a terracotta color? Yeah.

Is that the original colors of the tiles for these homes, Jeffrey and Patricia?

I'm sorry, what's your question, Paola? I didn't quite hear it.

Yeah, and the terracotta color, I mean, is it terracotta?

Let me look at the... A lot of these houses had terracotta tile. The terracotta tile color is very prevalent.

Okay, so that's one of the colors that is prevalent in this type of architecture.

Yes, absolutely.

Mm-hmm.

Okay.

Any other questions? Yes. Is this something you can see from the facade? This is the side. East elevation. Hold on. No. Sorry. It's not that.

Would the landscaping in front of that small wall go away? Is that the idea?

There's no reason to. Yeah. The county is going to make us put protection around the trees, and they'll want us to protect palms as well. So I don't see a reason why anything like that is going to get touched.

Okay.

I mean, maybe we'll update it, but.

Yeah. Yeah, I mean, arecas and all those, they just go crazy, so a little tailoring.

And your request was?

No, just for this addition, just to, again, clarify here, capture everything and the intent. The addition would be behind, would be covered, right, from the street. It would not be visible from the street.

Well, you'll have the low wall right in front of it that exists now, and we're going to be like five feet behind that. that's where the addition will be landscaping will remain because the front yard 25 feet yeah plus how far back i think we're maybe six feet back yeah so we're at around 30-ish the front yard is

Yeah.

We're not even working with the septic system because luckily there's a bedroom on the first floor and we're just shuffling. We're removing a bedroom on the first floor and then we're replacing over here so DOH cannot tell us to do anything with septic systems. There's no digging.

A huge advantage.

Same thing with the other house. We're not changing the bedroom count so the septic system stays.

Yeah, it works really well with this. And to Daniel's point, it's minimal. on the street.

Yeah, that's my main sticking point. It's minimal. In the other case, the other house that you presented, totally visible.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, corner. Corner, no landscaping, no knee wall.

Yeah, I have no further questions. Thank you for clarifying.

Okay, so anyone else?

Eddie, would you like to summarize?

On this item, I've noted the connector windows between the existing and the new addition shall be modified to match the existing window configuration. Number two, add a second column to the west side elevation on sheet A402 similar to the east elevation. And number three, relocate the existing French door sheet A402 west elevation from the existing structure to the new addition.

So I move to approve the request with those conditions.

Okay, I second.

I second it.

The 16th of September 2026 year of our Lord

You have two days to appeal if you disagree with your tax assessment.

Oh, it's two days? In 918. I did that once.

I tried. Afterwards, yeah, they laugh at you basically, but I'll tell you afterwards.

There's an amendment coming up to vote.

Oh, okay. There we go. Oh, right, right, right. Yeah.

All righty. So we have 60. Yes, Eddie.

That's why it looks very familiar.

Sorry about that. Thank you. All right. Next item is item 6C on the agenda, HP 2681. Address is 501 Northeast 94th Street. The applicant, Mr. Cesar Martin Piferetti, is requesting a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Board seeking to implement a new railing system at the converted second-story exterior roof terrace area located at the rear of the property. The applicant was approved by the Historic Preservation Board at the May 21, 2025 board hearing where a certificate of appropriateness was granted to the property for revisions to windows and fenestrations, replacement of stained glass windows with clear glass, widening of the garage door, and an additional relocation of windows and doors, including clear story windows and a pool cabana door. The approval also included the conversion of a roof area into a sitting room with a second floor roof terrace and railings. However, a condition of approval required that the proposed railing design for the new second story balcony be presented to the Historic Preservation Board for review once a preferred design had been determined. The property, located at 501 Northeast 94th Street, is commonly referred to as the Renoir House. It was originally constructed in 1935 in the Tudor Revival architectural style and designated as a local historic landmark by Miami Shores Village in 1984. The two-story residence sits on a 9,675 square foot lot comprised of 3,444 square feet of living space, including four bedrooms and three bathrooms. The property is also identified as a National Register of Historic Places landmark on the Florida site master site inventory form. Therefore, the applicant is before you tonight. The proposed railing is therefore subject to board review to ensure compatibility with the property's established historic architectural character, and they're seeking to install a new railing system at the rear second floor terrace of the existing Tudor Revival residence, as required by the previously approved certificate of appropriateness. The residence is currently under construction pursuant to the issued permit number RCO325-601. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the proposed request, and the applicant is here to discuss the project further. Thank you.

Welcome, Wesley.

Hey, guys. Great to see you all.

Very well known to the board. Used to be the historic chair. When I first joined. Hey, Wesley.

Hey, guys, again. Welcome. Thank you. Good to see you. Likewise. For the record, Wesley Castellanos, Castellanos Design Studios, 7300 Biscayne Boulevard. Great to see all you guys. I really appreciate you and your scrupulous review. And, you know, I'm going over all the details of all the applications you're going to find, especially this small application in front of you. a presentation then, and just to give you a brief background to what happened then and to where we are today. The owner, a friend of mine, purchased the home. It's a beautiful home, Tudor style. When we presented the application, it was to do a full interior renovation with an addition to the rear, which basically was a porch. It was an enclosed loggia. However, it had a sloped roof. AND THAT ROOF, WE DECIDED TO REMOVE THE ROOF, MAKE IT A FLAT ROOF. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, IT WOULD BE ON SHEET A1.1, WHERE IT WOULD BE THE KITCHEN ON THE ORIGINAL COA APPLICATION, SHEET A1.1. So that kitchen was originally an enclosed porch with a slope roof. We removed the roof, we made it a flat roof, and we turned the second floor to accommodate a terrace. So in the sheet next to it, you'll see a... SHE 8-1.2, THAT'S WHERE THE NEW ROOF TERRACE CAME INTO PLAY. THE REASON WE DID THAT IS BECAUSE THE ROOMS ARE, YOU KNOW, SMALL IN SPACE, AND SINCE WE CAN UTILIZE THE SECOND FLOOR, I SAID LET'S, YOU KNOW, UTILIZE THE ROOF. SO THAT'S WHAT WE CAME INTO, COMING INTO THAT DESIGN. IT'S BEAUTIFUL. THE HOUSE IS WELL MAINTAINED. THE OWNER SPENT, I MEAN, REGARDLESS OF THE MONEY, BUT HE REALLY MAINTAINED THE HOME. And he is a historic home owner from another house in the city of Miami. So in front of you today is a small request to show the railings. We went into looking at many, many different styles of railings. And what we have for you in front of you, if you look at the sheet that I gave you and the appropriateness, And this one, it's the last railing. It's the last photo on the railing. So this is the idea to put on the railing. This would be coal-compliant. It would be aluminum, a black aluminum, to be placed there. We went through the original picket. I'll show you a photo of the interiors, which I failed to present. But the interior had a small railing, if I may approach.

That's what the inside railing was.

It's nothing ornate, nothing...

to try to replicate.

So that's where we decided to take the advantage and try to create something different on the exterior and present this, which I believe it's a nice, unique railing system. And if we may, that really concludes the presentation and your favorable, I look forward to your interest and favorable approval. If there's any questions, please.

So that's to go up here in the second?

Yes, and that's all, yeah.

So, Wes, are you asking us to select an option from the pictures here?

No, I just presented one option.

It's the backup one. Jeffrey, it's option B. It's the one that has a little bit of curved top. Yeah, the top rail. The top rail has a little... Yeah, it's a beautiful, it's really nice.

Yeah, it's code compliant. It's really nice.

It's very beautiful. I do have a question. I was looking at the page where you said to look at the new terrace.

8-1.2? Yeah, 4.2.

It says EX for existing, I guess. There's two squares. Are those?

I want the floor. Yeah. Okay, so actually those are skylights.

Ah.

Those are skylights.

Okay.

Yeah.

More like to the that's below that it's the kitchen kitchen. Yeah the kitchen. Okay.

Okay, because if for this stuff for this home particularly The grand space which is the living space and the dining space had higher ceiling since that was originally Enclosed porch the ceiling was lower So believe it or not, structurally, so for you to know, we had to place a whole new steel I-beam in a span of about 25 feet to support this entire deteriorating, spoiling structure system, to support that. But we weren't able to go higher at that point, because it would just play with the hierarchy. So we kept it at the same height as where it started. The pitch, when it went down, we just basically Pivoted it. Pivoted it at that point. And then put an I-beam here.

Ah, okay, okay.

And it felt like a low ceiling in that space. That's where we put the skylights.

So it helps with the light coming in.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay. Yeah. Perfect.

No? This was the house where there was a thing.

Yeah, that was it, yes, the staples.

The word keeping. Yeah.

There was one that we went back and forth that we decided to replace one, and that was the one that was on the, which would be considered the west side.

With the stairs.

With the stairs, yeah, exactly.

But the other ones, yeah.

No, there were several. Yeah, there were several. No, I think that from the rendering, the house really cleaned up. Yeah. It cleaned up and still kept the characteristics.

The characteristics, yeah. We're still looking for, Patricio mentioned it last time, was the directional on the roof. The weather vane. We're still on a hunt for that. The weather vane. Yeah, the weather vane, thank you. We're still on a hunt for that. Yes, yes.

Agreed.

Because it was in old photos, and then I have my photos when I first did the site visit, and it was there. And then when he bought the house and the clothes, it disappeared. They took it.

Mystery.

And then Patricio, you guys pointed it out that it was gone, and we're like, you're right, it is missing.

Maybe on first dibs or cherish, you can find something.

Well, it's great to hear you're still looking for it, because that was really...

It was a nice feature.

Yeah, it was a nice feature.

So then up for discussion, it's the railing on the exterior, correct? Yeah. Because currently, in the interior, option B is in place.

Well, it was mentioned, yes. It would be, but it's not really the preferred for the client. It's not? It's not. This one. This one, the one here? This one here. Yeah. Oh, yeah, that's the one that's preferred. Preferred, got it.

I don't think it's the main tier. This is just a sample of the thing, a sample of the railing.

Yes, that's a different project. Oh, that's a different project. Okay, got it, got it, got it.

It's a sample of the railing that would go here. Correct.

Okay.

That would go outside.

And then the existing railing in the interior is what you just showed us when you approached. Correct. Okay. Got it. Crystal clear.

Very nice. Very nice. Yeah. Looks great. All right. Any other questions?

No. I make a motion to approve item 6C. Second. Do we have a second motion?

I second that. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye.

Appreciate you guys. Thank you so much again. Have a beautiful evening.

That's for option B, correct?

Correct. Thank you, Wes. Thank you, guys. Hope to see you soon. Appreciate you guys. Thank you. Have a great evening.

What is that? Today is, you just told me the date. The 16th. Year of Honour. All right.

Okay, to approve, one table. Mm-hmm.

I regret not speaking my mind on the first item, but I think it would be helpful for the owner. I'm in agreement with Patricia that adding a large addition there still messes with the front facade, but we'll see what the architect presents. I just wanted to say that in front of everyone, sunshine laws in place. That's where I stand.

I couldn't hear it, sorry.

No worries, just that we'll see what Victor presents for 6.A, but messing with that front facade, adding that addition, even if it's turned, it's difficult.

It's very difficult. He has a big challenge. And I mean, the kitchen has to be reconfigured. The kitchen has to be reconfigured because it's too much of a loss. It's too much of a loss. And talking about that, I wanted, because we have been having a lot of discussions about If this is allowed, if it's not allowed, how far should we get? What are we here for? Existential questions. But reading this part of the code, at least for me, gave me a lot of clarity. And from what I understand... What I read earlier and I could give again Yep, hold on Code research It's the Miami-Dade County Ordinance 81-13, Chapter 16A, Historic Preservation. Miami-Dade County Ordinance, which is our governing.

Yes, we all fall within that. Which we need to follow. And some things are in our charter as well from our ordinance.

81-13, Chapter 16A, Historic Preservation. So I think it's very clear that our role here is to make sure that the historic nature of these buildings is preserved. And that if there is something that is done to it, it maintains that continuity. It talks about, it used the word harmonious, it used the word... Features, let me tell you another one that is important. Compatibility. It uses the language to match, well, and many other ones. So I think it's interesting for us to be able to read it, to keep it in mind. There is always twists, of course, you know, and there's different approach, different ways of approaching things. There are magnificent architects that, for example, in Europe, they put in, I don't know, a glass building inside of a historic one, and it looks fantastic. But it has a complete reason and rhyme, and I think that's also part of what the architect, you know, It's part of what they do. But it is important that we keep that in mind, that it does say here clear that things have to maintain the color, the size, the materials, et cetera. So I think it's going to help us a lot. That's all. That's our guiding star. I agree.

I agree 100.

If I may add, What happened with the first house on the 102nd is something that, of course, I agree with you all that it's not going to be easy. to like try to work out, you know, both sides, but taking consideration that this is a house designed a hundred years ago and somebody comes here and then he wants to change upside down. Okay, let me take this, let me put that, let me, but I don't want to touch the kitchen, but I want this, this. So you cannot have it all in life. So I understand that, you know, you have to accomplish what, you know, new owners want to feel comfortable in their house. But also they have to take in consideration that they're renovating the whole structure of the house. So that's why some things need to be compromised. If it's the kitchen in this case, okay, let's go. But at least you have what you want. That was my message.

I agree with you, Patricia.

But since you brought that up, they are not modifying the entire structure of the house.

That's not what they're doing.

So when you make that statement, they're keeping 90% or maybe more of the existing structure. They're adding something to it, but the existing structure is being well-preserved.

So I don't know. I don't see that as they're modifying the entire house.

I still think the integrity of the house is there.

But what if in the next five years comes another owner and says, oh, you know what? I want to have another living room, or I want to have a library, or I want to have the pool moved somewhere else. And that's what I'm saying. So you have to also know that you have something that was already designed like this in, you know, like trying to invent, because these are like new inventions to try to put things where you want. You have to sacrifice something because it's not, you're not building from zero, from scratch. You're building what already was there. That was my message.

I agree with you. I mean, that's a good point.

And when somebody comes five years from now and says they want to modify something else, we'll take a look at that. We can deny that if it's really onerous.

Yeah, exactly.

For a fact that this house sat on the market for two years without a buyer, even though they lowered the price multiple times.

The price and the market is low. It has nothing to do with the living room.

It was initially overpriced, I agree, but they lowered the price multiple times. And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that one of the reasons this house didn't sell is because it was historically designated. I know you don't want to hear that. And I'm hoping that's not the case. But so we have to be, I think we still have to be reasonable. I agree we have to preserve the house as much as possible, which is what we're doing with this compromise that we're asking them to look at.

Yeah, I mean, I agree with everything we're all saying. And in some ways, we're saying the same thing. But there is a balance to living in a 100-year-old home and That's what we're trying to find, right? People want more space. There's a larger family. So trying to – and I am going to also get the guidelines, the state guidelines again, and send it to Eddie for everyone to review, that talks about the guidelines or best practices for historic preservation when there's additions and things like that because – We live in a different time than 100 years ago. We drive cars. We have air conditioning, right? So we have a lot of different modern needs in today's world and trying to work with homeowners. And I think that this architect, Victor Bruce, obviously even got emotional. He cares about the home. He cares about historic preservation. You know, we gave some really great feedback and I'm sure I'm confident he'll come back with some great solutions, right? Because we want to protect the historic characters and characteristics of these beautiful, beautiful homes. We want to respect owners who are now taking on this added responsibility that homeowners who do not have designated homes don't have. And so we're working with them as well because there are some things like the hand made tiles that are outrageously expensive and for most people not realistic. So trying to find the balance. And I think that's our responsibility as a board to be able to maintain the important characteristics, especially the facade, as homeowners modernize for today's living. So I will look for those best practices so we can all also, in addition to reading the Miami-Dade Ordinance, which is a great idea, I think we should also look at that for best practices for additions and modernizing these homes to live 100 years later.

Thank you.

And speaking of that, as part of our responsibility And Eddie, I sent you this, and I think he made copies, because there is a specific, in our ordinance, there's a specific section called incentives. And I want us to be respectful for that, and especially to the homeowners. So before Chris about incentives and that is also taken from the Miami-Dade where it talks about and I have it here hold on I printed it out to read it 611 6A incentives it is in policy of Miami-Dade County again what you were referring to to assist owners of historic properties in identifying various incentives that may benefit historically designated properties throughout the county Such incentives may include, for example, matching or non-matching grants from government and nonprofit entities, waivers, and exceptions to applicable regulations where allowed by law. So this new, relatively new, there was no cost for a request for a certificate of appropriateness. there was no cost prior to 2022. Of course, they have to pay the permit which everybody has to pay. So they have to pay a permit. But as of this resolution in 2022, they added a certificate of appropriateness fee of $250. So not only are we not incentivizing historic preservation owners, we are decentivizing them because they have to pay the planning fee and on top of it, another fee. So I think this is completely against the ordinance, the Miami-Dade County ordinance. And as such, I would like, because on top of that, at the last council meeting, apparently there was, and this is something that I've spoken to at this meeting. made we've made requests as a board to the village i don't know if they ever discussed it or not i was at village council meetings and i'm saying this all on the record again i was at a village council meeting and i discussed this uh you know and and about this and that the fee should be eliminated So now working with Warren, who obviously is a historic preservation owner and was on the board and chair for many, many years, worked on a resolution that I'd like to read and present, and I think that Eddie put it in there, to see if everyone is in agreement or in alignment or want to make any changes so that we can make a formal recommendation to the village council to eliminate this fee, which, in my opinion, actually penalizes historic owners, because on top of that, they have to pay the planning fee.

I agree 100%. Yes, I do. Absolutely.

Everybody got the resolution? Okay.

Yes.

Great to hear. Jeffrey, Patricia, Daniel, did you get a chance to read it?

Yes, I did, and I agree that it pushes owners to either defer maintenance or to not come to the board at all, and that's how we lose homes.

Right. Paula, I don't know if you got a chance to read it.

I read part of it, yeah.

And it just really discourages people.

So I really think this fee should be eliminated. Why are we punishing the people that are agreeing to designate their homes? It just doesn't make sense. I agree. I think it's a punishment. So I would like to request approval. And I just want to add that the fee is so inconsequential. That's what I was going to say. It's silly.

It's just an annoyance and a punishment for really not gaining much. Yeah, it's completely the incentive. And if it's a cost situation, then the village should raise the permit.

Thank you. So I think, especially in these days and times, we do have to be sensitive to what's happening outside of us. And I will say that there are many municipalities that are adjusting and assessing their fees overall because of what's going to come down the line, potentially with Amendment 3. You know, municipalities are trying to find creative ways to find funding because they don't know how things are going to shape up over the next couple of years. So, that is why you've seen recently that the Village Council was going to consider not only for the Planning and Zoning Department, all the departments across the board. It was Parks, it was Building, it was Public Works, our department, so on and so forth. Everyone is assessing their fees, number one, because many of them have outdated fees, and number two, because of what's coming down the line. To further add to that, I would like to add that while there is a permit fee, that essentially captures what happens within the building permit process, right, the reviews and the inspections. But there's also a planning schedule fee, and I feel that The certificate of appropriateness, what it covers is that it's not for the department to make a profit, but it's at the very least to cover the expenses that are involved with the amount of reviews that we undertake in order to process these applications. So the applications you have before you tonight, It's very often that we will go through at least two to three rounds of comments. Your application isn't complete. You have to correct this. Then we have to coordinate that. They have to come in, resubmit it. We have to make sure it's as good as it can be before we can place it on an agenda. Then there's also the day of the hearing. We have two staff members, but we also have an IT personnel. So that's three staff members. that are here present in order to facilitate the meeting. So I think the fee that's contemplated right now, I think it's meant to be an administrative processing fee that encapsulates all that legwork that the village is putting forth to process the reviews of these applications.

I understand all of that, and I'm certainly very sensitive to the cost and this new amendment. That said, and we're all living with every day the inflation, right? The inflation of living in South Florida. That's just the reality. That said, there was never a fee prior to 2022. And why? Because historic preservation, if again, we look at the ordinance, is something that benefits our community. It's why people want to move here. And again, we should be incentivizing. So while I understand there are financial costs, they weren't there before 2022, and If there needs to be other fees included across the board, that's understandable, but we shouldn't be decentivizing our historic preservation homes because that will just, you know, people won't want to do it, you know, and it's going to be a negative factor, I believe, to our village.

I can say any way I look at it.

I think that processing COAs for the historic board should be a cost of doing business. And if there is, granted there is a cost, then it should be subsidized by other fees or other parts of the budget. It should be part of the cost of doing business, in my opinion. The homeowner. And then the issue about, you know, I keep hearing this where, you know, these cities are concerned about Amendment 3, but Amendment 3 hasn't passed. So why are we raising rates before that? amendment, which I don't think is going to pass, but that's just my opinion.

And to your point, this revision was in 2022. That was way before the amendment discussion. There was no amendment discussion at that point. Go ahead.

Yes, Patricia. There's something important, if I may. The last year reports reported like eight certificate of proponent, 10. One year was only six. So how big? how many indeed certificate of appropriateness are we doing that, as you say, need to be, or as Jeffrey say, could be taken from another way of covering those costs and motivate owners, but this is completely against of what we're doing, absolutely.

Also, something else. If we want to be sensitive to a budget, I'll tell you the first thing that comes to mind that we don't need.

We don't need all this. We all have computers. We all have iPads.

We don't need to spend the money on all this paper. For example.

Don't print that. We have the applicants do all that work.

Okay. Okay. Oh, the meeting ended.

But if we can say... We have them do it, yes. So, or, you know, like...

Try to watch our budget as much as we can.

In the video, for example, I mean, I'm sure nowadays there's things that can be automated. Seriously, we need to think about it. If we're really thinking about budgets, we need to think more about those things, the things that we can cut that are going to save money because what we need is more people to want to make their home, designate their home. We have tons of beautiful homes in Miami Shores. Yeah. That a lot of people are like, oh, you know, I don't want to do it or I don't know how to do it. We have a very small percentage. And we have a huge potential of more people designating their homes.

We have to motivate them.

But in part of it, in actually taking advantage of what you just said, actually... it will be good to look for more grants and things that can help us to do that. I mean, I don't know in this situation, but I'm sure we can find, I mean, it will be good because that's what we need. We need more people designating homes because now we're gonna end up without the neighborhood that we have.

Right, exactly. And I think that, I understand, you know, Patricia, I think what Eddie was referring to, they're looking to cover administrative costs for these meetings, period, right?

And so they're getting it from,

this additional fee. And while I understand the need to cover those expenses, it seems like there could be you know, a different way spread across, you know, other ways, whether it's increasing the planning fee that everybody has to pay, right? A historic owner also has to pay that.

Let's add more fees to the people that are doing brand new homes also.

Or demolition. Or a huge demolition. You know, there's a fee for demolition, I'm assuming. Is there a fee for demolition?

Yeah, we have a whole department schedule of fees for new builds, renovations.

That makes sense. Yeah, all those things.

Yeah, I think we can study this and feel strongly about it. Send Eddie.

I will say that this item was already presented at council.