Recording in progress. >> Did he Did he eat yours? Oh, no. Well, welcome everybody. Glad you're here. I hope you haven't been too uncomfortable outside. Welcome to global warming. Just remember that they didn't have air
conditioning in 1925 or 26. So, we should we're all grateful that we're in this room. So, good afternoon and welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Coral Gables Historic Preservation Board. Those of us that are here are all residents of the
city Coral Gables and are charged with the preservation and protection of historic or architecturally worthy buildings, structures, sites, neighborhoods, and artifacts which impart a distinctive historical heritage of the city. The board is comprised of nine members. Seven of whom are appointed by the commission, one by the
city manager and the ninth is selected. Is it not on? There you go. Thank you. is selected and confirmed by the commission. Five members of the board constitute a quorum and five affirmative votes are necessary for the adoption of any motion. We only have six people here
today. Any person who acts as a lobbyist pursuant to the city of Coral Gable's ordinance number 2006-11 must register with the city clerk prior to engaging in lobbying activities or presentations before city staff, boards, committees, and/or the city commission. Copy of the
ordinance is available in the office of the city clerk. Failure to register and provide proof of registration shall prohibit your ability to present to the historic preservation board on applications under consideration this afternoon. Lobbyist is defined as an individual,
corporation, partnership, or other legal entity employed or retained, whether paid or not, by a principle who seeks to encourage the approval, disapproval, adoption, repeal, passage, defeat, or modification of any ordinance, resolution,
action or decision of any city commissioner. Any action, decision, recommendation of the city manager, any city board or committee including but not limited to posy judicial advisory board, trust authority or council or any
action decision or recommendation of the city personnel during the time period of the entire decision-making process on the action decision or recommendation which foreseeably will be heard or reviewed by the city commission or a city board or committee including but
not limit limited to posy judicial advisory board trust authority or council. Presentations made to this board are subject to the city's false claim ordinance chapter 39 of the city of Coral Gable city code. I now officially call the
[clears throat] excuse me, I now officially call the city of Coral Gables Historic Preservation Board of July 16th to order. And the time is 4:05 p.m. Present today are on my left,
Miss Eert, Miss Rolando, Mr. Silva, and on my right, Miss Spain, and Miss Alvarez. There are six of us today. The rest are excused and out. Okay. I'd like to have move toward the minutes.
Let's see. We have some distinguished people in the audience here. We have Miss Cal. We have who else? Mr. Tory. And all of you. Can I have a motion on the minutes, please?
>> I'll move approval on the minutes. >> We have a motion for approval by Mr. Silva. Second, please. Miss Spain. Second by Miss Spain, please call the question. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you.
>> Okay, we're going to move on to the agenda. Um, we're going to make one little movement here, but it'll be after we go through the historic designations. And so we're going to move the uh Palarito, which
will be under the special certificates of appropriateness, uh to number one and and just move that because that's a rehearing. So we're just going to trade the two of those, but that'll be later in the meeting. Okay, our first item on the agenda is
advalorum tax relief, which is case file AV 2025-00001. An application requesting advorum tax relief for the property at 720 Madiraa Avenue, a local historic landmark legally described as lock lot 7, block
7, Coral Estates section. According to the platbook 19, page seven, Miami Dade records, the related special certificates of appropriateness um COA SP 2024-040 was granted design approval by the
historic preservation board on January 16, 2025. Miss Cal. >> Oh yes, I missed that part. Okay. Is there anyone here um who wishes to speak today that needs to be sworn in?
Please stand up, raise your right hand. >> Anyone who will be presenting on any of the items being heard today, if you're going to be providing any testimony, please rise and be sworn in. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Maxwell. Can we verify if there's anybody on Zoom? Um, or should you want
to take those one item at a time? >> I'm sorry. >> Do you want to swear in people on Zoom now or do you want to wait till each item? >> If they're available, we can do it now. >> Okay. >> If not, we can do it when the item comes up.
>> We can wait till later. We >> Thank you, Miss Cal. Thank you. Thank you. If you can bring the PowerPoint up, please. >> Thank you. Uh the single family home at 720 Madera Avenue was uh also known as 710 Oispo Avenue was built in 1937. Uh
located in the Coral Estates subdivision. The home was an unincorporated date at the time of its construction. This area was annexed by the by Coral Gables in 1948. And there's a location map on the screen. This is the earliest photo that we have of the property. Um, and our early records are
a little bit sparse for this because this was an annexed area. Designed in the minimal traditional style, the home was designated as a local historic landmark in December of 2024. The applicant is requesting advorum tax relief for the renovation of the historic structure and the construction of an addition and alterations to the
residence as reflected in the certificate of appropriateness case file COA SP 20240 which was approved by the historic preservation board on January 16th, 2025. It should be noted that only portions of the proposed work will actually apply to the tax exemption, but
we're going to show you everything that they did. So, I'm going to uh give you some views around and before uh before and afters of the house as I discuss what they did. So, they had new impact resistant casement windows and doors to match the existing on the house. Removal
of aluminum awnings. Installation of fabric awnings. Restoration of original front door uh and hardware which you see here. A new white tile roof. Painting of the home. Removal andor res andor stucking of non-original brick planters
in the front. Restoration of the arched brick frame portico as an open air carport. Cleaning of existing uh stonework at the north facade. Firework restoration. Stuckco repair. Full interior remodeling and renovation of the home and auxiliary structure.
Restoration of original wood ceiling and beams. Restoration of original wood and tile floors. New MEP systems. Uh one-story addition that connects the existing residence and the existing auxiliary structure in the rear yard consisting of a full bath corridor and
master bedroom which approximately 285 ft which part of which you see here and a new rear deck with cascading steps. Um, the site improvements were limited to a new wing wall, aluminum gate, uh, new paper walkways, driveways, swimming pool, pool deck, and landscaping. The
owner is here or the the contractor is here. Uh, and if you'd like to say anything, if not, we recommend approval. >> Okay. Board members, any questions? >> Okay. Please go ahead, Mr. S. >> Um, it's it's a pleasure to see this
project come come back to us. Um, a lot of times we don't get to see the finished product. Um, and I think this is a great example of of restoration. Um, it's a great example on the economic side as well. Um, so that all folks out there can see um, that there can be a tax savings, that there is an economic
benefit to restoration and renovation as well. Um, so thank you, Mr. Tori. This is a great project, great job. Um, and it was it was a quick project as well. So, for [laughter] those folks that say things can happen quickly in the Gables, um, this is an example of of what
happens when you get a good team together and and, uh, you can accomplish great things. So, I'm I'm thrilled to recommend approval. >> I'd like to second and may I make a comment, >> please. >> I thoroughly enjoyed going through this.
That backyard addition restoration is beautiful. Yeah, it's it's not a big addition and it made a huge impact on the property. So, it's it's a really nice wellscaled um really appropriate addition. >> Lovely.
>> Yeah, it's a great project. >> Any other comments? I think we all applaud the effort. It's it's not only superb, but it's really in keeping with our traditions from the early 1920s. It's an excellent project,
and we hope to see more like it. Okay. Okay. Can I have a motion to approve, please? If there's no further any further anybody wishes to speak for against this in the audience. >> No. Hearing none. Okay. We'll come back.
Any further discussion, board? Okay. Hearing none. Motion, please. >> I will move approval. >> Okay. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Silva. We have a second. Second.
>> Okay. Miss Alvarez. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. >> We have all the motion, please. [laughter] >> Okay. Miss Rolando, >> yes. >> Miss Spain. Miss Ever? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Miss Alvarez, >> yes. >> Mr. Silva, >> yes. >> Mr. Maxwell, >> enthusiastically, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much and thank you for your good work. and keep it up. Okay, we're going to move on to the next two items here, which are local historic
designations. We have case file LHD 2025- Z006 and case file COA SP 2026-7 consideration of local historic designation of the property at 439 Mayorca Avenue legally described as lot
16 in the west 1/2 of lot 17 block 1 Coral Gable section B flatbook 5 page 11 Miami Dade County applicant is requesting the issuance of an accelerated special certificate of appropriateness and design approval for additions and alterations to the residence pergola
addition to the carport and site work. >> Mr. Maxwell, before we could be begin, if we could swear in um everybody on Zoom who's here for this item. >> Miss Gwyn. >> And just for everybody, we're having a little bit of um technical issues in the
room today. So, if everyone could make sure that they speak up and close to the microphone, we have a a full room, which is great. and we need to make sure everyone can hear in the back of the room. So, as you know, >> pull it as close to your mouth as you possibly can. Unfortunately,
>> thank you very much, [laughter] >> Miss Gwyn. >> I'm not going to unlock. >> Yes. >> Do you swear or affirm the information you will give it will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? here.
>> If we could ask it to um turn down that volume actually a little bit. We're having trouble hearing people on Zoom. >> So, I'm Elizabeth Guan, historic preservation coordinator, and our forward presentation is a summary of the historic resation report that was
cleared by staff. It can you please play the PowerPoint? Thank you. The property at 439 Mayorca Avenue is before you for consideration for designation as a local historic landmark. This is a very early home. It
is permit number 31 for the city and built in 1923. As per article 8, section 8-103 of the Coral Gable zoning code, criteria for designation of local historic landmarks, a landmark must have significant character, interest, or value as part of
the historical, cultural, archaeological, aesthetic, or architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. For designation, a property must meet one of the criteria outlined in the code. 439 Mayorca Avenue is eligible as
a local historic landmark based on three criteria. Historical cultural significance criteria four, it exemplifies the historical, cultural, political, economic, or social trends of the community.
Architectural significance. Criteria one portrays the environment and era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural style. And criteria two, it embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period or method
of construction. 439 Mayorca Avenue is in the Coral Gable section B on a 75- ft by 128 foot interior lot sitting on the north side of the street between Lune Road and Hernando Street. The property contains a
single family residence which retains its original style and character. Coral Gables was originally cined as a Miami suburb and attracted investors from across the nation during the South Florida real estate boom of the 1920s. Founder George Merrick drew on the
garden city and city beautiful movements of the 19th and 20th century to create his vision for a fully conceived Mediterranean inspired city. Coral Gables was recognized as one of the first modern playing communities in the United States.
Coral Gable's developmental history is divided into three major historical periods. Built in 1923, 439 Mayorca Avenue is amongst the earliest homes in the city and exemplifies the building upon which Coral Gables was founded.
Nationally acclaimed landscape architect Frank Button drew the first comprehensive maps of Coral Gables in 192122. one of which is on the left side of this slide. On November 26th, 1921, Merrick opened
Coral Gables up for sales and auctioning off 300 lots in section A. Booied by this success, on December 27th, he held a second auction offering section B up for sale and selling 400 lots.
Bounded on three sides by grand thoroughares Granada Boulevard to the west, Lune Road to the east, and Coraway to the south. Section B included an array of Merrick's planned features. Larger lots aligned Alhhamra Circle and
a wide boulevard with a lush center median and the impressive greenway drives that circled the proposed golf course. Also, a large portion of section B was platted with 50-foot lots that could be bought separately or bundled together, offering both affordable and higherend
options. In April 1922, Merrick extended a Humber Circle across Lun as the main business district thoroughare. In section B, the medium of Alhamra Circle became a bridal path. In August 1922, as part of Merrick's great
development plan, the plazas along Coral Way like Balboa Plaza were completed and three additional plazas in section B, Granada Plaza, Alcazar Plaza, and Castile Plaza were underway. In early 1923, the much anticipated
Coral Gables Golf Course and its country club opened. The clubhouse was the community's first public building and became the hub of social activities. All of these amenities and its proximity to the new business district were touted repeatedly in early marketing and
defined this area of the city. As a result, section B developed steadily in the 1920s and in comparison to other sections. It became a well-developed single family home area. With the exceptions of the residents along Alhammer Circle and along the
greenways, the homes in section B were predominantly one-story and moderately priced. Merrick drove for Coral Gables to be a socially mixed garden city community where people of various socioeconomic levels live side by side in quality
homes. Modest residents in the same construction and detailed to harmonize the larger Mediterranean Revival style houses were built throughout the city and they were an important piece of Coral Gable's early history. The home at 439 Mayorca Avenue is an
early example of Merrick's vision for these homes. Martin and Fanny Mastenbrook commissioned the home in 1923. is one of the earliest homes in Coral Gables and it is recorded as permit number 31.
Martin was born in Holland and upon his arrival in Miami in 1921, he opened his native rock company. He likely supplied the material for the Lentil Rock features. After moving into their home, Fanny
opened the Coral Gable's beauty shop a few blocks away on Pon Leon Boulevard in the new business district. While original plans or other early building records for the property have not been located to date, photographs
such as these dating to 1924 and the 1940s provide some primary documentation. The architect is unknown. However, given the date of construction, it was a member of MER's original design team as they were the only ones designing homes
in Coral Gables at the time. 439 Mayorca Avenue is designed in the mission revival style. In the 1920s, this style was used sparsely and seemingly only for modest homes, perhaps
offering a distinct look for them. The mission revival style was first developed in the 19th century and drew inspiration from the Spanish colonial missions heritage in the southwest. The resulting mission revival style is characterized by silhouetted shapes that
mimic the old Spanish missions with stucco facades punctuated by recessed windows and door openings, arches without moldings, and sparse ornamentation. The most distinctive feature of the mission revival style are the curved or
shaped parapit features evoking bell towers and bell gables. Roofs are commonly flat or low pitched with clay tiles. In the 19th century, the style never became popular outside the southwest.
However, in the early 20th century, variants of the style were built in the new suburbs throughout the country, of which Coral Gables was one. Merrick's initial building campaign relied heavily on Spanish precedents, and the mission
revival style fitted his vision. Listed here and discussed in the designation report are some of the character-defining features of the exterior of the home at 439 Mayorca Avenue. Most notably are the mission parapit,
the adobe inspired textured stucco, the Moorish inspired pointed arch chimney, segmental arched entry, the rough stone lentils and the decorative canalis. The one-story house is built of masonry
block units above a crawl space and is clad with adobe inspired textured stucco. Rectangular and plan, the living space is under a flat roof with simple mission style parapits. A slightly protruding articulated base
runs along all facads of the home. The restrained ornamentation is typical of the mission revival style. In the mission revival style, window openings are deep without any framing and have protruding sills. Historic photos show that the original
windows were single hung and casement in type. They were changed to jealousies in 1967 and by 1994 to clear view casements. Centered above most of the original fenistration openings are decoratively
arranged half round barrel tile vents. Located near each corner are decorative canalis. Canalis were common in flat roofed missions. The drain projected through the parapit directing the water away from the face of the adobe
structure. The use of barrel tile and canali's features are a distinctive mission revival element. There have been two additions to the home. The original rear projecting bay along the east facade was likely the
location of the original sleeping porch. In 1960, an addition for a den and a Florida room was wrapped around the northeast corner, largely encapsulating the sleeping porch. The second campaign occurred in 1993.
An open air terrace edition extended the front facade to the east and a carport was built near the northwest corner of the lot. It is not clear if the original garage was demolished during this campaign. Also, new entry landings and stairs were
added along the rear and side facades of the home. The front facade of the original home is dominated by two mission revival style characteristics, the curved parapits and the arched openings. The front facade has two bays, the
western living space bay and the slightly protruding front entry porch. Each has a central large opening with a distinctive Mission Revival curved parapit above. A convex pointed parapit adorns the living space and the typical
rounded parapit is above the front and the side entry porch arched openings. The parapit wraps around the porch with battlement quarter. Future windows and doors on Mission Revival style homes are often arched.
This house accentuates the openings with rough-faced cut stone. At the living space window, the stone is arranged in a jack arch fashion. The stone was removed or covered at unknown date. A change in stucco clearly marks
its location. At the original entry porch, the stone frames the shallow segmental arch of the front and the east facade. These stone features are extant. As seen in these historic photos, the
entry porch was screened by 1940 and then enclosed for living space by 1993. Rising near the southwest corner of the home on the west facade is a projecting and shoulder Moorish inspired chimney. It demonstrates the broader influence of
the Islamic architecture on the Spanish and its incorporation in the Spanish missions. This influence is also seen in the mission revival style. The chimney is a hallmark feature of the home. Flanking it were small windows which
were blocked up around 2013. The west facade also has a mission revival parapit at its center. The photo on the right shows the 1993 steps leading up to the bay that was originally the sleeping porch. The large
screen opening of the porch was expanded to accommodate French doors. At the southeast corner of the home, a substantial open air terrace was added in 1993. Its masonry elements are clad in stucco whose texture is distinctly different
from the original 1923 home. Decorative canalis were also installed. The terrace is easily distinguishable as an addition. Behind the terrace, the east facade of the 1923 portion of the home is largely
retains its original configuration and detailing. Since vegetation obscures this facade, a historic photo is provided for reference. A small pop out bay occurs midway down the facade. It is under a front-facing
gap roof clad and barrel tile. Barrel tile is common feature of the mission revival style. In this home, it is used for decorative accent vents and for cladding in the small roof. Another small mission style parapit rises along the northern end of the
facade. It mirrors the parapits on the west facade. In the 1993 historic photo, the 1960 rear edition is visible in the background. Orping an L at the north end of the east
facade is the 1960 rear edition. This edition has simple parapits and is clad in stucco whose texture is visibly different from the adobe inspired texture of the original 1923 home. There is no ornamentation on the edition
and the windows have modern proportions. The 1960 edition is clearly differentiated from the original 1923 home and does not adversely impact its historic integrity. A detached garage built contemporaneously with the 1923 home
originally stood near the northwest corner of the home. Newspaper ads in the 1930s refer to it as a twocar garage. As seen in the 1924 historic photo, its mission revival style parapit and adobe
inspired textured stucco complemented the home. Property surveys indicate that it was a woodframe structure. It was demolished sometime after 1978 and before the 1993 alterations campaign.
A new carport was erected slightly to the east of the garage's location. The 1993 carport is simple flat roofed masonry structure clad in textured stucco, which along with its large rectangular openings is like the
contemporaneous open air terrace in the front. The auxiliary structure also reads clearly as a later addition to the property and does not detract from the historic integrity of the property. In conclusion, 439 Mayorca Avenue
exemplifies the Spanish inspired building archetype upon which Coral Gables was founded. And it is also significant as one of a handful examples of the adaptation of the mission revival style architecture in George Merrick's planned community.
constructed in 1923 is one of the earliest homes in the city and it exemplifies Merrick's vision of modest homes in his socially mixed garden city community. Hence, the property at 439 Mayorca Avenue is part of a collection of
quality buildings that serves as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city. It retains its architectural integrity and significantly contributes to the historic fabric of the city of Coral Gables. Staff recommends approval of the local
historic designation of the property at 439 Mayorca Avenue based on its historical, cultural, and architectural significance. Are there any questions of the staff about this designation board?
Any questions about the report or anything? Okay. Hearing none, I'm going to Are any members of the audience wish to have any pro or con comments on >> Mr. Maxwell? I'm sorry. If you could please move the microphone closer. We're
having a lot of trouble hearing you today. Thank you. I know it's not the most, you know, >> natural feeling, but >> it's it's quite all right. I'd rather be heard. All right. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this application?
>> If not, we'll come back to the board. Okay. Board comments, questions. Motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> We have a motion from Miss Alvarez. Um, I'll second it with with a comment
that I think it's uh clearly historically significant. Um, I'm I'm surprised that it's existed this long without being designated. Uh, but you know, we're getting it now hopefully. >> And Miss [snorts] Alvarez, Miss Spain,
if I can just confirm that your designation's based on the staff report and for the same criteria outlined in the report. >> Absolutely. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Okay. We ready for any further discussion? Ready for a vote then?
Please call the question. >> Mr. Silva, >> yes. >> Miss Rolando, >> yes. >> Miss Everard, >> yes. >> Miss Alvarez, >> yes. >> Miss Bane, >> yes. >> Mr. Maxwell, >> yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank
you very much and congratulations. Okay, we're going to move on to the next item, which is case file LDH 2025. I'm sorry. >> Do you want to do the COA? >> Right. Sorry about that. >> For the certificate of OC. Yeah. Okay.
Cara, >> and for the record, this is the um COA SP 2026007. >> Thank you. >> Can you put the PowerPoint up, please? So this uh this is an application for the issuance of a special certificate of
appropriateness for the property at 439 Majora Avenue, now a local historic landmark, legally described as lot 16 in the west half of lot 17, block one, Coral Gable, section B, according to the plat thereof, is recorded in plat book five at page 111 of the public records
of myian county. So, oh, we're going to skip straight to the presentation because you all have just seen all about this property. The application requests design approval for an approximately 350 square ft uh one-story addition to the east of the
home that converts an existing uh open air pavilion into living space, construction of a trellis covered terrace to the east of the existing carport, minor alterations to the residence and site work. Um I did want to just note that the windows of the addition uh match the existing clear
view which were no mountains on the residence. Uh those were installed circuit 1994. So our feeling is that in the future when the windows on the house are to be replaced they will be replaced with um proper units that staff can help work with them for period appropriate historically accurate windows on the
house. And that way the windows on the addition will then be differentiated from the uh existing historic residence. Um there are no variances that have been requested with this application. It was approved by the board of architects in November of 2025. Um we did have a number of staff
conditions. On the last page of your report um listening to the designation uh presentation, I did want to add another um another condition that the coral stone at the east side door opening is to be retained when the addition is made. So, if that can be uh
considered as part of the approval process, I'm going to turn it over to the architect. >> Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rafael Partz and I'm representing Riota's architecture studio. Um the intention with the with the addition is just to
convert the the addition that it was made on 1993 into a living space and instead of having in the facade that opening with a fabric uh cover has um
just let me move forward. Let me go to the front facet. So, it's having a the right side of a property, having that cover area and converting to a living space with a bar tile roof matching the same uh aesthetic of a
stock of the existing house and uh creating a new a new living room and slash dining room to the to the residence. That is the main uh modification in the front facade. It was requested uh by the board of architect
the replacement of the front door. Instead of having the glass uh front door, replace it with a wood a solid wood uh front door matching the the aesthetic of the revival style. Um in the backyard uh this is the
original picture of the house and uh at the back jar we are that is the elevation I'm sorry and um as you can see and propose this facade at the rear side that is the backyard we are
proposing to uh rebuild the existing carport and uh keep it as a carport as our original uh was designed in the in in the house and uh putting a pergola next to it uh because the intention from the client originally was using the
carport as a as a gasebo. Well, we suggest to to keep the original carport in the property and adding an uh an accessory structure next to it, which is the the gasebo that it's going to be a pergola. It's going to be an open open tris. It's not going to be fully roof.
Um, this is kind of the style of the of the rear facet and we're adding a pool as a request uh requested by the by the owner by the new owner. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else that wishes to
speak to this? >> Okay. Any board members questions of the architect? >> I have a a brief question. Have you looked at the staff report at all the conditions that staff is uh um asking you to comply with? Are you
okay with those the conditions in the staff report? >> Uh yeah. I mean uh we we didn't get the is that was sent to us. >> I'm sorry I couldn't uh I couldn't read it like completely but uh but >> I can read them to you.
>> Yeah. >> Windows and door and >> what? Okay, thank you. Take your time. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> You're okay with all of those? Yeah, 100%.
>> And and also with the retain >> I'm sorry, Mr. Orlando. [laughter] >> And also to retain the Coral Rock um >> in the front. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Correct, >> Mr. Sman. Um, I I um I appreciate the the design work. Um, I don't have an issue in closing. I mean, we are drastically changing the front facade, but we are altering a 1993 addition. So, I don't have an issue in closing that. I
think it's a smart move and and it keeps it as a one-story uh solution, which I think is smart. Um, I would, um, whoever is making the motion, uh, if you would entertain, um, right now I think you're counting on the vehicular gates as part
of your pool gates, and that is not allowed by code. So, you're going to have to add some fencing somewhere. >> Um, so I would ask that you work with staff to establish that fencing because I think it's going to have to go through that carport and the gazebo area. >> Um, and that has to be handled
>> well. Um, so I would ask that that gets added to the conditions um as Okay. as we make a motion. >> Okay. That that's acceptable. >> Yes. Okay. >> For the pool. Yeah.
>> Miss Rolando, any questions as ever? >> Miss Spain, anything further? >> Um, so there there is a reveal. There's a setback a couple of a couple of inches on the Can you go back to the
front facade? Well, maybe not. Okay. So, there is a way to differentiate the addition from the original, right? I mean the the
>> I guess this is more for staff the main entry and then it steps back to where in the plans it shows a dining room table. Okay. >> Yeah, Miss Payne, I think I think there's Yeah, there's a setback on the front. Yeah, there is an step back of 2
ft from the front fac of the addition that we are proposing to enclose. Yeah, >> there are two feet difference between both. >> That was my only concern, but I think it's fine. >> Miss Alvarez, >> I agree with Alex. >> Okay. Are there any other questions? Any
further discussion on this board? If not, is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for or against us? Hearing none, we'll close that and come back to the board. Okay, board. What's your pleasure? >> I'll make a motion if that's approved.
>> Okay, we have a motion by Miss Spain. >> Uh, I'd like to make a motion to approve the design proposal for the addition alterations uh to the residence on the property located at 439 Majora Avenue. um
with and approve it with the conditions noted in the staff report with the addition of retaining the coral rock around the I think it was a door doorway and then also to work with staff in the future on the pool enclosure the the
gates and the f fence and everything um uh and with an issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness Second. >> Okay, we have a second by Miss Ever. >> And Miss Bage is clarifying that this is an additional requirement for the east
side door opening was my understanding. >> The Coral Rock. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Would you please call the question? >> Miss Albert? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Rando? >> Yes.
>> Miss Spain? >> Yes. >> Miss Ebert? >> Yes. and Mr. Maxwell. >> Yes. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Look forward to seeing this in person. >> Okay, we're going to move on here to the next case file, which is another
combination. It's case file LDH 2022-014 and case file COP 20226- 015. Consideration of a local historic designation of the property at 446 Aragon Avenue legally described as lot
one block B lot I'm sorry block 8 section um Coral Gable section B according to the plat thereof as recorded in plat book 5 page 111 Miami Dade County applicant is also requesting the issuance of an accelerated special certificate of appropriateness and
design approval for additions alterations to the residence and site work very Variances have been requested from article 2 section 2-101D4 and article 2 section 2-101D5
for the rear setback of mechanical equipment. May we have a presentation please? >> The property at 446 Aragon Avenue is before you for consideration for designation as a local historic landmark constructed in 1924. It was permit 189.
The application was filed by the owner. As per article 8, section 8-103 of the Coral Gable zoning code, criteria for designation of historic landmarks, a local historic landmark must have significant character, interest, or value as part of the historical,
cultural, archaeological, aesthetic, or architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. For designation, a property must meet one of the criteria outlined in the code. 446 Aragon Avenue is eligible as a local historic landmark based on three
criteria. Historic cultural significance. Criteria four. It exemplifies the historical, cultural, political, economic or social trends of the community. Architectural significance criteria one.
that it portrays the environment and era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural style. In criteria two, it embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period or method
of construction. 446 Aragon Avenue is in Coral Greyel section B on a 50 foot by 110t lot on the southeast corner of Aragon Avenue and Hernando Street. The property contains a single family residence and a detached garage which
retains their original massing style and character. Coral Gables was originally conceived as a Miami suburb and attracted investors from across the nation during the South Florida real estate boom of the 1920s. Founder George America drew from the
garden city and city beautiful movements of the 19th and early 20th century to create his vision for a fully conceived Mediterranean inspired city. Coral Gables is recognized as one of the first modern plan communities in the United States.
Coral Gable's developmental history is divided into three major historical periods. Built in 1924, 446 Aragon Avenue is amongst the earliest homes in the city and exemplifies the building typology upon which Coral Gables was founded.
Nationally acclaimed landscape architect Frank Button drew the first comprehensive maps of Coral Gables in 1921 and 22, one of which is on the left in this slide. lots and section A went on sale in November 1921
followed by section B in December. Section B is bounded on three sides by Grand Thoropares of Granada Boulevard to the west, Lun Road to the east, and Coralway to the south, and it included an array of Merrick's planned features.
Larger lots lined a Humber Circle and the Greenway drives encircling the proposed golf course. However, the majority of section B was platted with 50-foot lots that could be bought separately or bundled together, offering both affordable and higherend options.
Section B developed steadily in the 1920s, and in comparison to other section, it became a well-developed single family home area. The homes in section B were predominantly one-story and moderately priced.
Merrick strove for Coral Gables to be socially mixed garden city community where people of various socioeconomic levels live side by side in quality homes. Modest residents of the same construction and detailed to harmonize with the larger Mediterranean revival
style houses were built throughout the city and they are an important piece of Coral Gable's early history. The home at 446 Aragon Avenue is an early example of America's vision for these homes. Charles and Olivia Parin commissioned
the home in 1924 as their retirement house. It was one of the earliest homes in Coral Gables and is recorded as permit 189. While original plans or other early building records for the property have not been located to date, this early
photograph provides primary documentation. The architect is unknown. 446 Aragon Avenue is designed in the Mission Revival style. In the 1920s, this style was used sparsely and
seemingly only for modest homes, perhaps offering a distinct look for them. The mission revival style was first developed in the 19th century and drew inspiration from Spanish colonial mission heritage in the southwest. The resulting mission revival style is
characterized by silhouetted shapes that mimic old Spanish missions with stucco facades punctuated by recessed windows and door openings, arches without moldings, and sparse ornamentation. The most distinctive features of the mission revival style are the curved or
shaped parapit features evoking bell towers or bell gables. Roofs are commonly flat or low pitched with clay tiles. In the 19th century, the style never became popular outside the southwest. However, in the early 20th century,
variants of the style were built in new suburbs throughout the country, of which Coral Gables was one. Merrick's initial building campaign relied heavily on Spanish precedents, and the mission revival style fit his vision. Although a simple version, the home at
446 Aragon Avenue celebrates this style. Listed here and discussed in the designation report are some of the character-defining features of the exterior of the home. Most notably the mission parapit, the butchering wing walls, barrel tile
accents, the chimney with the adobe inspired stack and belfry inspired top grouped round vents and horizontal lines reminiscent of adobe veas. The residence was designed as a two-bedroom home with covered in front
and rear porches. There have been no additions. There are very few building permits on record for this home. Primary alterations consist of enclosing the screened porches, window type changes, and height and reduction of some of the smaller windows.
The one-story house is built of masonry block units above a crawl space and is clad with adobe inspired texture stucco rectangular in plan. The living space is under a flat roof with simple and mission style parapits.
The large curved parapit is a strong identifier of the mission revival style and is repeated around the home. Barrel tile adorns the flat parapit copings around the house. Strategically placed above the parapits are horizontal groupings of round clay
vents. The horizontal arrangement of these round features evoke the veas of adobe structures. The windows are also typical mission revival style. They are singlehung windows with upper sash muttons. It appears that most of the original
windows are extant. At all corners of the home, winged walls gently kick and flare out, hearkening back to the buttressing at the corners of adobe structures. The front facade is dominated by two character-defining features of the
Mission Revival style, the curved parapit and the arched openings. The main entry to the home is through the slightly projecting eastern porch bay. Centered at the top of this bay is one of the distinctive mission revival parapits with an applied plaque.
Accesses through the central archway that is flanked by the narrower arched openings sitting on projecting sills. The east side facade has a larger arched opening which also has a projecting sill. Arched opening supported by large square
columns is a character-defining feature of the mission revival style. On the porch, a horizontal protruding band runs across both facades at the height of the arch's springer line, thereby visually suggesting it's a capital for square column supporting the
arches. The band wraps through the arches and continues on the interior, thereby completing the illusion that it is a capital. At each corner of the porch, wing walls begin their flare just under that band
and appears to be buttressing the columns. Originally screened, newspaper sales ads suggest that the porch arches were closed with the current awning window ensemble in 1983. The western bay of the front facade is
slightly recessed from the entry porch. At its center is another curved mission revival parapit under which is a double window ensemble. Above the window is a faux arch with an applied plaque. Below the window is a masonry window box
supported by masonry corbals. Aligning with the top of the faux arch at each side of the ensemble are three round vents in a horizontal line. This bay is repeated at the center of the east facade facing Hernando Street.
The chimney rises toward the northeast corner of the home. The stack flares out towards the ground in a manner reminiscent of a typical adobe architectural forms. Belelffries were also common in Spanish colonial missions and their forms are
common in mission revival style. In this home, the top of the chimney is shaped like a belfry and its gable is capped with barrel tile. The east side facade appears to retain its original configuration and features. The sole alteration is the height of
reduction of a window at the south end which likely occurred during a pre-1980s kitchen remodel. It remains a jealousy window. The sill was retained and thus the original size of the window was easily discerned. The remainder of the windows appeared to be
the original single hungs with top sesh highprofile muttons. The westside facade also remains largely intact. At the north end of the facade is a slightly projecting entry porch. Centered on the facade behind the porch
is another curved Mission Revival parapit. Running across the parapit is a horizontal line of seven round vents again reminiscent of Adobe Vas. Below is a single window and it's the only apparent alteration to the facade.
The bathroom window was reduced in height, but retains it sill, so it's the original size is easily discerned. The reduction seems to correspond with interior alterations that occurred in the early 1980s. It's currently an awning window.
The remaining retain their original size and hold what appear to be the original single home windows. On the rear facade, gently flaring out at the southwest and southeast corners of the home's original living space are butchering wing walls.
Behind the living space is a projecting bay that was originally the screen back porch. A 1981 permit for the current awning windows indicate the screens were replaced by jealousy windows in the 1950s. The rear entry to the home remains
through this bay. Behind the home is a detached onecar garage that is likely contemporaneous to the home. Built of masonry units and covered in stucco whose texture matches the house. It is under a flat roof with parapits. The street facing facade has a
curved parapit in the mission revival style matching those on the home. Barrel tile coping flank this parapit. The side parapits are simple and unadored. On the north facade is a masonry screen with the palm tree motif. It is not
original to the structure and it likely replaced a window. A window on the rear and north side facads were reduced to accommodate the current awning windows. Like the house, the sills were left in place and hence the original size of the windows is
easily discerned. In conclusion, 446 Aragon Avenue exemplifies the Spanish inspired building archetype upon which Coral Gables was founded and is also significant as one of a handful of examples of the adaptation of the mission revival style architecture in
George Merrick's plan community. Constructed in 1924, it's one of the earliest homes in the city and it exemplifies Merrick's vision for of modest homes in his socially mixed garden city community. Hence, the property at 446 Aragon Avenue is part of a collection of quality
buildings that serves as a visible reminder of the history and the cultural heritage of the city. It retains its architectural integrity and significantly contributes to the historic fabric of the city of Coral Gables. Staff recommends approval of the local
historic designation of the property at 446 Aragon Avenue based on its historical, cultural, and architectural significance. Great. Okay. [clears throat] Board questions. >> So, this was a result of the owner
applying for a historic designation. >> Yes. >> Very nice. >> You're here today >> waving. >> I appreciate that. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Are there no other questions here
from the board? We're going to ask if uh >> I think that's out of our jurisdiction. Uh is there anyone in the audience or or on Zoom that would like to speak for or against this? Okay. Hearing none, we'll come back to the board and having no questions, we'll
ask I'll ask for a motion. >> I'll move. >> Okay, Miss Rolando makes a motion. Uh, I move uh that the board approve uh the local historic designation of the
property at 446 Aragon Avenue um based on its historic, cultural, and architectural significance as set forth in the staff report. >> We have a motion. It's a May I have a
second, please? >> I'll second it. >> We have a motion. A second by Miss Ever. Okay. Would you please call the question? >> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Spain? >> Yes.
>> Miss Rando? >> Yes. Miss Ebert? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion passes unanimously. We'll now go to the second part of the for the COA. >> Okay. So as uh previously described um this is the property at 446 Aragon
Avenue described as lot one block 8 of Coral Gable section B according to the plat thereof as recorded in the platbook 5 page [clears throat] 111 of the public records of Miami Dade County Florida. Today we present to you uh as noted 446
Aragon has a historic significance and has been minimally modified um as requested by the applicant. We are also submitting to you guys a addition that they would like to do um and also a
variance uh request. So the addition is composed of just a detached a connection to the detached garage to the original party uh to the original property at the rear end. It will be partially seen at Ernando Street and basically take over
on the southwest side of the rear lot. The request for the variance that we would want you to see is basically a request for the mechanical equipment. Uh the requirement from zoning is 10 ft of rear setback and currently they are
proposing a four uh feet 6 in. >> Okay. Is there a presentation by the architect or the owner? >> Please state your name for the record, please. >> In addition, I do want to add that the property owner is going to be pursuing the Coral Gables cottage designation. I
was going to say that. >> So that's where we are limited to the one-story condition. So their footprints a little bit bigger than you would usually allow with zoning requirements and um that is where the request for the HVAC equipment came from so that they
can spread out a little bit without having to go up which was a big um >> so there's there's no um variance for lot coverage. >> No >> based on the cottage right requirements. >> Cool. That was my question. It's working
in this one. Isn't that interesting that it actually works? >> Please introduce yourself. >> Good afternoon. My name is R. Cruz. I'm an architect with Nomar Architect Studio and I'm representing the owner for 446 Aragon Avenue. Can we see the plans on
the screen? Oh, I got them. Thank you. >> Yeah, I did. The property is a one-story residence built in 1929 located at the corner of Aragon Avenue and Hernando Street. A
proposal is intended to preserve and rehabilitate the historic home while adapting it to the owner's family and contemporary needs. The project includes renovation of the existing residence and a 616 square foot one-story addition connecting the main house to the
original detached home. original detached garage. Sorry. The addition is located between the two existing structures. Its flat roof and intermediate height create a transition between the residence and the garage allowing the original massing and
historic character of the home to remain dominant. We are preserving the home's defining exterior features including the original texture stockco decorative details and planters. We will continue coordinating with historic resources staff on the final windows, doors, porch
treatment, stock of roofing and other details to ensure the compatibility with the historic photographs. We also request approval of the rear setback variance for the mechanical equipment if the proposed location behind the wind wall and a gate next to the existing
garage uh is the least usable option due to the corner lock configuration. We respectfully request approval of the COA and the associated variance subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Thank you and I will be happy to answer any questions. >> All right. Thank you board. Miss
Alvarez, >> I um I agree with the staff report and the um and the addition. I I just had a a question. Some of these garages were often built out of wood frame. Have you um have you looked at that? >> We have the roof is a wood frame, but
not the walls. snow. >> Oh, that's good. >> Yeah, [laughter] >> that usually creates some new some additional uh challenges >> for sure. >> Miss Bane, do you have any comments?
>> No, I I think that this will change the u livability of this house. It's very efficient plans. It's very nice. Thank you, >> Mr. Silva. Um yeah, I I echo my colleague
sentiments. I think it's it's a great project. Um and I I appreciate the effort that's gone through um and the kind of maintaining the cottage and and the single story. I I did have I I did want to speak on the on the um variances. Um so just to clarify the
rear variance, right? Um we were asking to reduce the clearance from the property line to the mechanical equipment to 4 foot6, right? Um, and that's based on a 10-ft rear setback. I did want to point out that if this equipment was on the side, right, and
they had room for it, that would allow a five-foot setback. So, really all we're looking at is is a 6 inch difference. I understand since it's on the rear, but just so we all keep that in mind, right? It's not a five foot. I mean, it technically is a five foot, but in practicality, it's less, right? Um the I
did have a question on on the the way that the cottage setback variance is being applied, right? I don't want them to run into a problem later on with zoning and have to come back as we've seen sort of recently. Um because has zoning looked at this at
all? >> Yes, they So they because the the way that the thing that the um the code reads specifically says that you can exceed this you can wave the side setback right up to the line of the
existing house and no less than 2 foot six right so you're in compliance with the 2 foot six but since the property line skws >> you're closer to the property line at the addition than the other condition I want to make sure that we don't need a variance for that um
>> but we >> and that zoning has vetted that already >> but we also aligning the addition to the >> I understand I understand I'm I'm in favor of this [laughter] I just I just want to make sure that you don't have a problem later on right like >> so I even if we so we only noticed for
the ones that we identified with zoning zoning did have initial comments at first because of course the building hasn't been designated and hadn't been designated Coral Gable's cottage so there was a plethora of zoning comments because in a as a non-desated building, it would not meet any of the zoning
setback requirements, ground coverage, anything like that. So, we went through and um they met with zoning. So, this is where we ended up. Is there a chance that maybe between the permitting process, they did already get a first round of comments, so we'll make sure,
>> but we wanted to move this forward because we had kind of been going around in circles for a little bit and they were eager to get started and get the permit drawings in and all of that. So, We appreciate it, but we can't even add zoning com variance today if it hasn't been noticed. >> Understood. And I'm not sure it would be
a variance. It's a matter of interpretation of the zoning code. >> Exactly. >> I want to go on record and say I would be in favor of this interpretation as it's as it stands now. Right. That aligning the building. >> Stephanie is all ears. I I as the um department tasked with interpreting the
zoning code, I um hear your comments. They're noted. >> Thank you. Uh, do you have any objection uh to the conditions noted in the staff report? >> No, I don't. >> Okay. So, the owner has accepted those. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Rondo, anything else, Miss Ever? Any comments from you? >> I'd like to make a comment. I think this is a an exceptional adaptation. So, I really commend you. you've uh you've put forth
not only really good energy on it, but you've maintained a building that that's hard to maintain. So, thank you very much. And [clears throat] okay, so we've gone through everything. Okay. >> If I could add one thing, um just we do
learn a lot from Elizabeth's reports and presentations. She did mention that the palm motif was something that was added later on. So, it is a condition. it was a condition to maintain it. If you all want to work with staff on that now that we know it's not original within that report, we'll, you know, we could remove
that as a as a you know condition. >> Well, it would be great if we can remove that because hard to integrate right now. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> What do you what do you >> It was a palm motif that's uh like a concrete screen in the garage that exists on the north elevation.
>> It looked very 50s. >> Yeah. But, you know, you see them sometimes and they're never designed uh special anymore. So, we've been kind of holding on to them a little bit more than usual, I guess. And since it's going to be >> What condition is that?
>> It was number 10. Condition number 10 was to palm motif. >> Yeah. Um but Elizabeth did mention in the report that it was something that was added later on. So, we don't need to maintain it if it's not original and if you know we could work they want to work with it for another location, we could figure that out. But I don't want to
hold it to them if it's not original. Hold them to it. Sorry. >> Okay, great. Any other questions? Staff of staff or Okay. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for against this or is there anyone on Zoom? Okay, we have none. So, we'll close that
and close the public hearing and come back to the board. Okay, board. Do we have a a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> Okay, Miss Spain. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to approve with the conditions noted in the staff report other than
condition number 10, which you can work with staff with. U, but I'm not including it. Um the design proposal for the addition and alterations to the residence and site work on the property located at 446 Aragon Avenue, a local
historic landmark as of today and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness. Um and should I do the variance also? Go ahead. Approve a variance to allow the mech mechanical equipment to maintain a
rear setback of 4'6 in versus the required minimum rear setback in a single family residential district shall be 10 ft pursuant to article 2 section 2-101D4 and article 2 section 2-101D5 of the
Coral Gable zoning code. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have a motion. I have a second, please. >> I'll second. Miss Albert seconded. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Please call the question.
>> Mr. Silva, >> yes. >> Miss Ronaldo, >> yes. >> Miss Ever? >> Yes. >> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Miss Spain? >> Yes. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.
All right, we're going to move on to the second >> special certificates of appropriateness section. And we're going to move item number two, which is um case file COA SP 202616
to number one if that's okay. Okay. [clears throat] Then the rest will follow in order. Good afternoon, Anna Peris, preservation officer. Um, if we could please have the presentation up, please.
Um, and just, um, just to notify you all, the applicant could not be here today. We did give I did speak with them and they are on Zoom. So, um, Callum Gibb, the architect is going to be presenting on, um, digitally, but um, I'll begin with a brief introduction. Um
this is an application for 4,400 Palmaro Street, a contributing resource within the Italian Village Historic District. Um this property was designed in 1926 by distinguished architect Al Clingbiel and uh the property was designated a contributing resource within the Italian
Village Historic District on November 17th, 1992. Um the applicant is requesting design approval for demolition work, additions, and alterations to the residence and site work. Um in addition there are variances have also been requested from article 2 section 2-101D4B
for the side setback of the garage edition and from article 2 section 2-101D4 C the rear setback for the rear setback of the two-story garage edition and the one-story covered terrace.
Um the addition proposed is mostly um located within the rear property at the detached garage. Uh at this property there was um some back and forth about where exactly a good location for an addition would be since it is a prominent
elevation. I mean is a prominent structure on the street and has a very large sideyard. It was the architect's intention to bring a two-story addition to the rear using the detached garage as the best location to to create a significant modification that wouldn't
really alter the character of the historic district and the original um Palarito structure. [snorts] Um the side setback and the rear setback conditions are um our requests for the variances for um oops uh to allow for those
setbacks in the ex to match the existing setbacks of the original garage. Um the twotory portion will have a let me just go back believe it's uh 5T from the rear yard from the rear yard rather than uh the 10
ft that's required. And again for the side setback it was the same the the sorry the two rear setbacks was for a 10T requirement and requesting a 5-ft um setback. Uh again, staff worked with the
applicant closely. Um we do understand that there is a major modification and uh significant demolition work that's being done to that rear structure. The building is minimally visible from the street didn't have much um character
from what the site visit that I completed. And the one-story portion of the garage is actually being maintained so that that line of sight from the street is um remaining the same from the driveway. Um, I'll go ahead and let Callum um, present. He is on Zoom and
will need to be um, sworn in. And staff is recommending approval with the conditions noted below. Um, some of these conditions have already been addressed within his presentation. So, he'll go through that as well. Hello. Would you raise your right hand, please? [clears throat] Do you swear or affirm the testimony
you're going to give today will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. >> Good day. Um, apologies for not being able to be uh in in attendance to this meeting and I really thank you for giving me the opportunity to present by
Zoom. We were scheduled for last month and it got um >> Could could you turn your volume down a little please? >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> It would be from CGTV if you could turn the volume down in the present in the room please. Callum, your volume is should be fine. It would be on our end.
Thank you. >> Okay, give it a go, Callum. >> Okay, is that better? >> Yes, thank you. Okay, just again um we were scheduled for last month and uh juices and processing we got put to this
month and unfortunately I was already uh scheduled for a bit a trip out of town. But uh going to the uh project I need to share my screen to show you the drawings. See if I can get that a little bigger. >> Amazing.
>> There we go. We've got them up. >> You have? Oh, fantastic. >> Yes. >> So, I'm just going to run through the drawings. Um, this is sort of the cover sheet just showing the uh this the two-story addition to the rear of the property. Uh obviously the house is part of the um
wonderful Italian uh village district which you know for me has always been that sort of uh part of the gables where the setbacks uh in the front um was sort of um usually smaller than in other areas sort of creating these sort of uh lovely walled street uh appearances. Um
the other benefit of this obviously means you get a lot of courtyard feeling within the district. Uh, pardon me. Uh, the the house is on a fairly large wide lot. Um, and there's been a pool uh added which takes up the whole sideyard
as you can see from the survey. Existing site plan just a little diagrammatic in the rear. The the one-story cottage which is attached to the existing garage uh is the area where our addition will
sit. Here are some photographs of the of the property. Um, along the front you can see that that that house creates a a very much a a continuous facade with a extended wall to one side culminating in an archer sort of bugilia arch to the
which leads [clears throat] to the garage in the rear. Um, see so this is our proposed site plan. The idea being to um take down the one-story guest house in the rear and replace it with a two-story addition because it
then becomes a um an addition. We have to attach it to the main house in some manner. So that uh and we thought the best way to do that would be with through a breezeway with a minimal impact on the main structure. Some diagrams. So these are the two
comparing floor plans and you can see that the the breezeway connection which leads conveniently from the the kitchen breakfast area across to the to the new ground floor and then into the uh through into the garage undercover
second floor. Uh again existing house there is a small open porch on the second floor of the existing house which is uh in the area where the roofed breezeway will connect to the house and we can address that later. Uh this is the main uh ground floor and
the idea is to expand the living area with some uh you know sort of a home gym, a game room which could be used for guest uh bedrooms and then upstairs two additional bedrooms and a home study. This is the front elevation. Um the
house is uh has had some renovations, but the the idea of this drawing is to show that the little outline of the of the addition in the rear and um and how that the existing house really is is uh keeping its presence on the street.
Again, this is a side. So, this is looking from the pool uh to the towards the house. You can see the breezeway connection and the um amassing of the uh two-story edition. Uh this is from the uh southside looking
across. You see the um the three windows are sort of in the sort of original house. As you can walk as you sort of move back into the property, you can see the garage, the two-story edition and the existing uh porch that overlooks the courtyard.
Uh this is a rear elevation of the house showing the connection. And this is the the the new rear of the property. Uh on the bottom is the existing one-story garage and a guest house. And then above is the new
twostory uh edition. Uh this is a little section that takes the shows how the the breezeway really um forms a little connection piece that sort of creates a a lovely courtyard between two open porches overlooking from the in the addition in the same
manner that the original house has a porch overlooking this courtyard. Uh I'm going to just show you uh some renderings here just to show the um impact really from the street by locating the addition in the rear. Uh we
felt like they sort of isolated that home uh as a complete structure and kept it uh sort of as original as possible with a minimal impact on that on that structure. And then in the bottom right you can see this uh sort of creation of
this courtyard which uh it sort of uh is developed between the existing house [snorts] and the and the new structure. Uh in the uh one of the conditions in the report was a discussion about how the roof of the breezeway attaches to
the existing house. Um I did a little detail here just showing that the um the end of that roof we can create a a gable which uh which would sort of act as a termination for the roof tile and the
termination for behind the railing of the wood railing of the house. I have some pictures also of that porch. I wanted to show you the uh the wood like they disappeared.
Try again. Okay, so we got two little porch details here. I think the what they show is that the the main uh wooden structure is actually the the beam that runs across the top of the porch and that the the vertical elements are really just a cladding to the masonry.
You can see that I don't think there's an embedded wooden column in that corner. I really feel it's sort of an implied wooden column. So that way when we attach to it, I don't think we're going to affect anything structural in that uh in that area and we can adapt that as staff seems uh you know would
deem it most appropriate. So with that in mind, I'll go back to the renderings and I feel that you know um like I say the the goal of this was to expand expand the property uh the living
quarters but maintain the original house as intact as possible. And um if you have any questions, obviously I I've seen the comments. They all seem very reasonable. And hopefully uh we'll come to an agreement on how best that detail between the addition
and the main house is resolved. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Ken. That really that's very lovely. Thank you. Okay. U board questions of the architect and the presentation. the had a question. The only variance
request is um about the flat roof. >> No, the the um existing garage is uh close on the south property line. It's closer than 5T and so when we ex when we add to that we have to m we maintaining that side setback. So that's one
variance. The second variance is the location of the addition at 5T from the rear property line. Uh whereas a 10 would be a uh >> other requirement. >> I believe there's three variances requested. Um clarified
>> the third one. The third one which is an odd one is that if you see the the onetory porch uh which is attached to the twotory that has its own variance because it's one story. >> It also has a variance of being closer than 10 ft to the rear. is I believe it
it's like a 8 ft. >> Oh, I I think it's a good >> Mr. Silva. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Miss Alvarez. Go ahead. >> Go ahead, Alex. You can go. >> No, I just had a question before we begin this question. the um for for Callum the Were you proposing to do the
the kind of the wall to receive that gable at the at the um at the second floor balcony? >> I thought it Yes. I I thought rather than having the the tip, you know, if you if you didn't do a what I thought I'd do is raise a a concrete curb or gable at that point so that when you're
looking through the railing, you don't actually see the over overlapping tile. you would just see the the a true concrete gable and then the tile would abut behind that gable. So you wouldn't have the issue of having to cut clay tile and have it in contact with the
with the with the railing there. There would be a cleaner break between the two. >> Okay. So there's a clean a clean wall in front and it follow it's it's a gable. So or or is it >> Yes, it would it would be a a triangular
in profile. Let me just get the um uh so it sort of cuts into the if you were on the porch looking out uh you would you would look through the railings and see the the back side of that concrete gable. >> Okay. And you're confident you can save those those rails. Um
>> yes, the rails are not original. They're um they uh let me sorry I'm just going to scroll to a photograph. Uh they're they're set on the center of the beam above. So they're sort of in board maybe four inches into the into the porch. So
they would not be in contact with a concrete element that was set um flush with the concrete wall. >> Thank you. >> Sorry, my images are disappearing as I zoom in. But but on the porch railing
detail, you can see that the railing is set back and it's it's not they're not actually turned railings as you would expect on original. They almost feel like they've been uh cut out of a flat piece. So they they feel um that they were uh probably replaced over during
their lifetime. >> All right, Miss Alvarez, any any questions? No, I I just want to say I support the the proposal and I agree with the staff um recommendations and the variances.
>> M >> I'm good with it. >> Miss Ever, >> Miss Rolando, Mr. Silva. Yeah, I I in speaking about the variance, I think the the addition and and the way it's being handled and set to the rear is is great.
I think the massing works well. Um and you're creating another one of these courtyards you talk about right in in the district. Um I'm a little bit concerned that one of the justifications we're using to justify the variance is to save historic fabric and then we're
tearing down a big chunk of that existing building, right? Um, I think that that by keeping the garage that sort of mitigates it a little bit and and and at that point it makes sense to sort of hold that line. Um, so so I am I
am in favor but it it's not uh to me it's not cut and dry. I am in favor though I believe that that um the variance is justified. >> Thank you. >> Any further questions of the board?
Any further questions of Mr. Mr. Gibb? Okay. All right. Thank you. We're gonna now open it up to the audience. Is there any person that wishes to speak for or against this item? Is [clears throat]
there anyone on Zoom other than Mr. Callum? No. Okay. Well, then we're going to close the board hearing and uh move back here to the board. Okay. discussion board. >> I'll make the motion.
>> Okay. Motion by Miss Rolando. >> Okay. Uh I move uh for approval with the conditions noted in the staff report the design proposal for the additions and alterations to the residence and to the
site um work um on the property located at 4400 Pomearito. uh a contributing resource or structure in the Italian village historic district uh and uh for
approval of the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness again with the conditions noted. >> Okay, we'll take each one of the >> Yeah. of I think I prefer to take the variances one. Okay. So, we're going to
take the first motion, please, of four. Okay. So, I've got a motion on the table. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Mrs. Spain. Okay. Would you please [clears throat] call the role? >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes.
>> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Miss Eert? >> Yes. >> Miss Rolando? >> Yes. >> Miss Bane? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Second motion to approve. >> I move that we approve a variance to
allow the garage have a south setback of 3'6 in uh versus the required minimum of 5 ft pursuant to article 2 section 2-10001 D4 of the Coral Gable zoning code.
>> Okay, we have a motion and a second. We have a motion. I need a second, please. >> I'll second it um with a revision that it's section 2-101. >> I think you clarification. >> One zero. >> Yeah, >> we got a extra zero snuck in there.
Okay. Would you call the co roll, please? >> Okay. Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Ebert? >> Yes. >> Miss Rando? >> Yes. >> Miss Spain? >> Yes. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion carries. Okay. Next. >> Okay. Uh, a motion for the board to
approve a variance to allow a new twostory addition have a rear setback of 5 ft versus the required minimum setback in a single family residential district
of 10 ft. Uh, pursuant to article 2 section 2-101 D4C of the Coral Gables zoning code. >> Okay. Okay. Have a motion. >> I'll second it. >> Second. >> Miss Albert. Miss B. >> I'll second it. Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Please call the role. >> Miss Alvarez. >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva. >> Yes. >> Miss Ebert. >> Miss Rando. >> Yes. >> Mr. Miss Spain. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion carries. >> Okay. And for the final >> Okay. The final um motion to approve a
variance to allow a new onestory covered terrace addition to have a rear setback of 5 ft versus the required minimum rear setback in a single family residential district of 10 ft. Um, if
compatible with the neighborhood character, uh, the historic preservation board as applicable may allow for a setback of 5 ft. Uh, pursuant to article 2, section
2-101 D4C of the Coral Gable zoning. >> Okay. Have a motion. Second, please. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Miss Spain, you're on a roll. A question for Mr. Rockorn before we >> please. >> Why why is this variance if the zoning
code allows it already by >> I think it's at the discretion of the board. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you for the clarification. >> You have to be a finding that it's compatible with the neighborhood just to be a finding made. >> Uh do we need to have a finding that it's compatible?
>> I I think your motion says that it is compatible. I that's how I interpreted your motion. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I agree with that interpretation. >> Thank you. >> As do I. As the >> second Thank Thank you for all the agreements. Would you please call the role?
>> Miss Everett? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Miss Bane? >> Yes. >> Miss Rando? >> Yes. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion carries. Okay. All >> All All approved. Okay. We're going on
to the next item, please, which is case. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much, Callum. >> Okay. Do we need to take a break for anybody? >> Just a just a quick one. Okay. We're going to take a quick >> Miss Alvarez >> restroom break
>> for We need Miss Alvarez as um >> Yes to a break. >> Yes to a break. Yes, we all I think we all need one at this time. Okay, we'll come back and call it 10 minutes. Is that okay? >> Thank you. Recording stopped.
all out, but we have five. And oh, she's coming in right now. So, we're going to go ahead and keep everything moving here a little bit so that we can get everybody out of here and on their way. Okay. Whenever you're ready, we'll start
the uh recording back in process. >> Recording in progress. >> Okay, wonderful. We're back in session. Thank you all for your patience. Okay, we're going to go to um previous item number one, which was relocated to number two, CA, where this is going to
be case file COA SP 2025- uh 19, an application for the issuance of a special certificate appropriateness for the property at 547 Alcasar Avenue. a contributing resource within the Alcasar Historic District. Legally described as lot 24, block 13, Coral
Gable, Section B, Platbook 5, page 111, Miami Dade County. The application requests design approval for the enclosure of an open front porch with impact resistant windows and doors. [snorts] >> Good afternoon. Um, this is an
application as mentioned for 547 Alcazar Avenue. This property was before the board on September 18th, 2025 in the Historic Preservation Board reviews an application um to install windows with a wood grain finish and glass selection of gray. Um after a thorough discussion and
two failed motions, the item was continued. Um on March 19th, an updated submitt responding to staff's recommendations was received. The applicant is requesting design approval for the enclosure of the front porch with impact resistant windows with black frames and clear glass. Uh this request
was before you all in April and again was continued because of uh two failed motions or maybe one failed motion. Um at this time um the property owners are here. Um there was some discussion about
um if the conditions that were set in the first report were met and I just want to clarify today that the conditions that staff had included if the proposal was going to be considered um were all addressed. So there were some items within that report that they
did comply with and include in their new proposal uh which included to consider dividing the window openings um where the top of the original porch railing was located. Clarify the frame color to be used. Clarify the interior railings at the east and west doors or considered fixed windows. Um no alterations are to
be made to the existing original front steps and wing walls. Window and door buttons were to be high profile dimensional and the window uh glass to be clear, no reflective, no tint and no low E. >> Anna, just a quick question here. Um the
report, the COA that we have here or that I'm looking at is from April. >> Oh, sorry. We just didn't there was no update to the COA because the modifications there's been no change since that March proposal. At the April meeting, we were hoping we they requested a continuence because we
didn't have a full board, right? >> And in the months past since then, we still haven't had a full board, but it's been three months now and the applicants are ready to move forward. Um, they're here today. Uh, Whoops. Sorry.
>> Right. Okay. But before they come up, I have a question here. Um, based on what you just said, has staff changed its recommendation? So, our recommendation remains the same. We're we're pretty consistent about not wanting to enclose
original front porches, and yes, they can be considered on a case-by case basis. I think we had very clear uh requirements of if they are considered that these would be the the ideal situation. In this case, even more so because they are retaining the original
front wall of the building. Most people would be doing this in order to blow out that wall and make a bigger living room, family room, dining room. Um so there was some discussion at the last board about whether or not that becomes an interior wall, an exterior wall now that the porch was being enclosed. Um we have
been in discussion with the applicants and they were going to I believe if you want me okay they were going to profer and we got clarification from the city attorney um that we could do a covenant so that that in that original front wall
can be retained as part of the historic designation and um reviewed for further you know modifications in the future. So that covenant can run with the property and then we'll flag it in our permit system in our files so that any modifications for future owners, maybe
not them, that try to modify that wall um would have to come through our process. >> Okay. >> Um but their intention is to maintain the wall, the existing um casement windows within it and the front door. >> Another question. So in your review from
last time to this time, has it ch has the design changed? because it appears to be that it's, you know, >> Yeah, I was just going to try to get to the maybe that was the better rendering. >> Yeah. So, the the the design now is more in keeping with a screened in porch
condition rather than a casement window condition. >> So, it is a more simplified design. Let me go to the elevation so that's it better to read the >> the line drawing. And their intention too was to have um
operable windows at the top half, right? And um [laughter] and fixed uh below so that they're still able to um have an open air space if the weather is fits. >> Okay. You want to are we going to have
another pres new presentation or we're just going to have a discussion? It might be good to hear from them directly just for the record and then um we're here to answer any questions that you might have. But >> sorry if I may just to to be clear the
document the most recent document and the one we should be looking at is the one that's labeled 547 Alkazar permitting uh 031926, right? And the and the revised renderings, right? We're not looking at the old, >> right? The old was because it's all in the same case. So that that's the
revised is the ones from April. >> Is that the date on it? Yeah. >> And this is the newest >> from March. March. >> March. Sorry. Apologies. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> But that it's only that's the proposal we're >> that's the proposal and that's the proposal that responds to the comments
from the September report. >> Okay. >> Thanks. >> Okay. Okay. Property owners, please reintroduce yourself again. It's good to see you. >> Hi, my name is Karina Lorenzan. I have not been sworn in, so I don't know if that has to happen before we start. I
apologize. >> Yes, please. Both of you, if you're going to testify, can please be sworn in. >> I was here. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry, I can't see with this thing [laughter] here. >> Yes. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Javier Diaz. I'm the other property owner.
>> So, as mentioned by our very nice introduction here, this is not our first time here. Um, we are hoping to create a more usable space um within our home that still preserves the aesthetic that
we absolutely love. We chose an old Spanish home. I grew up in historic Coral Gables on Navare. We we wanted to be here our entire hopefully most of our lives. I've only known him 12 years, but um this has been our dream for the space
uh since we bought the house. Um, this allows for us to have a more usable space regarding any weather weather conditions. It is also something that's removable if anyone in the future decides that they prefer the screened in aesthetic that is currently there. Um, although we hope to be at this property
for some time. Um, we've taken all of the advice and recommendations at multiple meetings as long as meetings with staff and we've tried to integrate them to the best of our abilities. Um, as mentioned, the glass matches the rest of the home. The frames are black wood
grain. Um, they are operable casement windows that should hopefully be beautiful if we ever have the chance to see them with a fixed structured bottom to allow for safety. Um, we have a very rambunctious, wonderful almost three-year-old who will forever be too, but I want him to be safely to be able
to play at that area if possible. Um, and that was definitely taken into account as well. Um, I really think that the Excuse me. the one of the main points and I know that Anna mentioned this as well. We
have a existing interior wall at the porch currently that has the original windows to our home with beautiful cranks. They have become heavily warped and heavily disturbed over time that has a lot of air leak. It is a element of the home that we really like though and we'd like to preserve. And this would
allow us to both preserve the integrity of a porch while having a more usable space, maintain that windowed area to be able to allow us to functionally keep it in our home. Our interior of our home is maintained in an old Spanish style. We did not buy the house and scrub all the
walls and make them smooth. The stuckco is there. I chose that for a reason. I love this. Um, and I hope that you see that we're not trying to, you know, change anything. I also, we're both willing to sign whatever is necessary with the city attorney's help to
maintain that wall as is. I apologize for not knowing the correct vernacular. It is not my area. Um, anything that you have to add? >> We're open to any questions, suggestions, etc. I know that we've already presented to you before. I hope that you'll allow for some
reconsideration. Um, thank you for your time. >> Well, thank you. And I apologize that you have to be here so many times. I do have a question for you and hopefully it'll it'll help everyone clear it up. Have you seen a a picture or anything like that of the early home showing the
screen pattern or has you worked with staff on that just so that sort of documented? >> Yeah, it's not. >> We do have the 1940s photo from um and from our files. It's hard to read because there were awnings on the
property. Um, but there was one from I think the 70s. >> Sorry, >> not that one. Yeah, >> the top right. >> Yeah. So, we were going off that top right. 1980. Sorry, apologies. Oh, this >> where you got the bar at the bottom and then it's split in half. Yeah, I can see
that. >> Yeah. Yeah. And then in order to make them operable was why that like that horizontal I mean sorry the vertical in the center was added so that they could have like a casement condition on the top half >> like a third of the way up crossbar. >> Right. Yes. And that would meet the
requirement for um the 36 inch railing height. >> And so the windows pretty much match what that looks like as best as you can. >> That was the best as best as they can. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. Okay board. Let's have some questions and discussion or so that
we can move forward. Miss Spain, if you'll turn that on. >> A question and a comment. Are you aware that you need five out of the six of us here to vote? Just want to make sure. >> Yes, we're aware. >> Okay. Um and also if this was coming to
us uh not designated and they had done someone had done this exact thing uh and so we were looking at it for a designation with glass in that opening. We could easily designate it as historic
saying that it does not impact the historic integrity of the house. We've done that before. I just thought I'd bring that up because it is removable and in the past, not that not we go by what we do on the cast on a case by
case, but if this came to us prior to being designated, I believe that we would designate this home even if it had the glass in those openings. So that's my comment. >> Thank you. That's a good comment. Miss Alvarez, do you have anything that you
wish to add or or ask a question? Um, I'm going through the files, but I'm looking for a proper plan that shows the attachment. Um, I'm sorry if I missed it. I'm trying to open up because it's a it's a bunch of um individual here.
>> Can we get the PowerPoint back up? [clears throat] >> You need uh Did you want a complete floor plan? I don't think there is a complete floor plan because they weren't making any changes to the rest of the building. >> So, here's a floor. >> I just think this is so much about how it attaches, right? Because you have the
the special columns on the front column. >> So, that has to attach. >> Oh, I think I know what you're referring to. Corre correct me if I'm wrong, but are you asking if the front structure will at all be inhibited by the installation of the windows? Because I do know the answer to that. So I think
um Anna if you look at the photo here to the top left the the columns are actually set on top of their um concrete wall. So you could even see the surround the yellow behind the column. So they should be able to attach in that same um
plane so it wouldn't damage any of those decorative elements. We had also been hopefully assured that that's the case and then any reinforcement, right, because that's probably what's going to be necessary for that would have to happen behind that column anyways. >> So, you might have to build out some of
the walls some, but it'll be on the interior side, >> right? I just feel like that's an important consideration that should have been part of the package. >> I will say that with the column, that column doesn't protrude in the back. It is a very, it's flat on the back. it is
concrete like you will be able to uh nail in the the windows for like the frames. >> We've been assured by that by both the window company and the installers. >> So we can add that if if again if this is considered today there could be a
specific detail requested for the construction documents to ensure that that is um included and that those um elements are protected during construction. Okay. >> If considered, >> Mr. Silva. >> Okay. >> Um, yes. Thank you for working with
staff. I I appreciate that. We did have some concerns previously when we were discussing this and I'm glad you heard them. The doors on the ends are gone. The the the pattern is more appropriate. Um, as to Anna's concern. C, can you go back to the to the actual photo, not the rendering? I believe that those columns
are as as as Miss Peris was saying, kind of in front. So, there shouldn't be an issue. I think we're going to be you're going to be attaching to concrete direct flat concrete, right? >> Yeah. >> If you >> Yes. >> You go back. Yeah. If you go back to that one, right, you can you can kind of
see it here clearly in the in the blowup. And if you go to the package and you zoom in >> here as well. Yeah. >> So, you're going to be attaching to to concrete and and if any reinforcements necessary, you know, you come inboard, right? Don't don't go outboard. Um, but that's that's a typical thing, right?
That that you would work your permanent drawings. um through his staff. So I I am in favor of this as it currently stands. Um so yeah, thank you. >> M Rando, any questions, comments?
>> I like what uh the reconfiguration. I think it's um it's projecting the uh preserving the legacy at least of the screened in porch. and thank you for
working with staff on it. >> Thank you, Miss Rondo. Miss Ever. >> Uh, since I joined this board about a year ago, um, so many of the houses that come to us are in the North Gables and they're the small houses that, uh, need
more space to make them more livable by today's standards. In fact, the house that we just designated at 446 Aragon had a front porch front and and and the two on each side that had were glassed in and we just
designated it. And um as I said when this first came to us, uh as a young family, we did much the same thing in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It was a 1920s stone house that the the porch was uh
screened in and then we glassed it in as our family grew. We needed the additional space and I can tell that you are very sincere about loving this house. So, I'm saying the same thing I said before. I'm very much in favor.
>> Well, thank you, Miss Okay. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak for against this item or is there anyone on Zoom? There's no one on Zoom. Is there anyone in the audience? No. Okay. So, we're going to come back to the board for a motion. I'd
like to have a motion, please. >> I'll make one if I can get to the staff report. [laughter] >> I'm having the same issue. >> Yeah, Mr. Z is trying to get there, too. You want me to take a go at it? >> If you wish, Miss Rondo. Happy for you to. >> Uh, I move that the board approve.
>> I'm sorry, Mr. Rolando. Could you speak it to your microphone a little bit closer? The Zoom is having trouble. [laughter] >> Okay. Sorry. Uh, I move that uh the board approve uh a special certificate of
appropriateness for the windows as depicted uh the windows for 547 Alcasar Avenue uh as depicted on the drawing uh within the
materials dated um March 11, 2026. Um, >> are you going to include the um conditions in the staff report? >> Um, yes. Um, so my understanding is that
the proposal that you are approving, the the March plans already comply with all of those conditions, but um, Anna, perhaps you can confirm that those conditions aren't needed because they're met in those March plans. >> Yes, those were those were already met, the ones that the six that are listed
within the report. Um, but if you wanted to include the one of, you know, just to ensure that we're protecting the exterior columns, we can add that now. Um, >> oh, the back wall. Oh, so that's again up to you all if you want to require that covenant. It's something that they
would profer before you all um to be able to include the protection of that front wall. Well, original phone wall, whatever the will of the board is, right? >> I'm not quite sure how to phrase that. >> So, Mr. Mr. Rolando, if if I understand
your motion so far, it's to approve the plans presented today, the March plans, and approve the certificate of appropriateness, um, if you want to add a condition about the covenant, it would be to accept their profer of a covenant to be worked out with the city attorney's office to um, retain
jurisdiction over that wall for histo by the historic preservation board going forward. And we can work on the exact language, but my understanding is that's the the gist of the >> profer. Okay. So they would be to the
motion would have two parts. First uh a certificate of appropriateness for the um plans as submitted with the configuration and size um of the windows depicted on the March 11th. And the
second half would be that there be recorded a by the homeowner a covenant running with the land that would uh recognize and protect the
original front wall uh of the residence uh and allow the city and board historic preservation board to h uh retain jurisdiction. over it in the event there's a prop any modification in the
future. >> Understood. Thank you. And um just to be clear, was there an additional um uh condition regarding the interior buildout if needed the uh interior wall of the
>> No, it will be reviewed at staff level either way. So, perfect. I understand your motion. >> I don't think we need to get that granular. >> Understood. Yeah, we your motion. >> Okay. I'd like to second if I can. >> Okay. We have a question.
>> I'm sorry, but uh this you say the six have been complied with, but uh number five is the muttons are to be high profile and number six is uh no reflectivity, no tint, no low E. I think those that should be included. >> Included.
>> Okay. >> Miss Rolando, do you want to include those? >> I would accept that amendment. Um I don't know whether I'm able to make an amendment. >> You are. Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> There's discussion after the second. >> And we need a second on the motion as
amended. >> A second on the motion as Miss Evers. >> Okay. We have an amended. Amended. A motion. >> Would you like me to restate the motion, Mr. Maxwell, briefly? >> I think everybody. >> You're all going to give the homeowners a heart attack. >> I [laughter] think I think we all have
it. approved with two conditions and the covenant. >> Yes. And it's in one motion. >> Yes. Understood. >> So, if we call the question, please. >> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Spain? >> Yes.
>> Miss Rolando? >> Yes. >> Miss Ebert? >> Yes. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Absolutely. [laughter] >> Thank you. >> Her time is a charm. >> Thank you for your perseverance. >> All right. You guys are good. Thank [laughter] you. We'll work on the rest with
>> perseverance in the face of preservation. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> I think they move faster in Italy. >> 118. >> Okay. We're going to move on now to uh case file COA SP 2026-004.
This is an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 118 Florida Avenue, a contributing [snorts] resource to the McFarland Homestead subdivision Historic District. Legally described as lot 20 block 1A,
McFarland Homestead by the Plat Platbook 5, 8, page 81, Miami Dade Records. The application requests design approval for an addition and alterations to the residence and site work. Variances variances have also been requested from
article 10 section 10-10 number 4A and article 5 section 5301 of the Coral Gable zoning code for the elimination of the required off- streetet parking and to permit wood construction. >> Thank you. I have the PowerPoint back
up, please. >> It's the location map of the property uh in question. It's in the McFarland district just uh north of Grand Avenue. This is a probably 1980s photo if I'm not mistaken. So, the historic district
uh McFarland Homestead subdivision historic district was first designated by the city of Coril Gables in September of 1989. In May of 1994, the district was listed on the National Register of Historic Places and it remains our only district on the National Register. woodframe single family residence at 118
Florida was built circuit 1930 and it's an important example of an intact early bungalow in this historic district. So the application is requesting design approval for an addition to the rear um of the property of approximately 620
square ft alterations to the residence and minimal site work. There are two um variances that have been requested from the zoning code. The first is uh to allow the residents to not provide a carport or portico share.
The majority of these residences in the district do not provide co uh covered off streetet parking as required by the code and there is no evidence that a garage or carport ever existed on this property. We feel that the addition of such a feature would be detrimental to the historic integrity of the structure in the district as a whole and support
the granting of the variance. The second variance has to do with the granting um to allowing woodframe construction which is not currently allowed in the city of Coral Gables. Again, the existing residences in the historic district to utilize woodframe construction and wood sighting as part of vernacular
architecture. The use of wood as a construction material is unique to this district and the only place in the city where this type of architecture and construction does exist. The use of wood as a construction material is entirely appropriate and would res uh respect the integrity of the architecture of both the historic building and the district.
Staff supports the granting of this variance as well. Um board of architects approved um ultimately on July a week ago um 2026 and uh we do have a bunch of staff
conditions that are noted on the last page of the report. Um I did want to note that one it's not a condition but it probably should be that the existing residence is um in need of substantial repair and restoration work um which is
is not noted anywhere. No notes or information were provided on the plans um about what that restoration work is going to entail the scope of that work um what what that plan is. So that all needs to be incorporated into the permit set of drawings. So we're we're abundantly clear of what exactly is
happening on the historic fabric of the existing house. So we have a um a presentation on behalf of the property owner um who was not expecting to present. So be kind. So let's um move it forward for you. All
right. So forward backward. >> Hi good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Cabba and unfortunately the architect and the owner of the home couldn't be here today. I just want to say something briefly. This is the fourth such structure that this owner has purchased
as they have an interest in preserving as much of the West Grove as possible. Um this is a 1930s bungalow shotgun houses some people call it. Um I think Cara gave you most of the points. I'll
do my best to answer any other questions um that you have. As she mentioned, it would be in addition to the rear of the house, it's minimally visible from the street. We plan to preserve everything else about the facade of the home with the exception of the things that need to
be replaced, windows, doors, and that type of thing, including the railing and the porch and other things that um have been mentioned. As Cara said, we're looking for two variances. One is to be able to build the addition to the home uh with wood construction.
That was actually a recommendation from the board of architects um in to be consistent with the existing structure. And the other as Cara mentioned um is to wave the requirement for having a covered off- streetet parking um
structure. Um these are just if you have any specific questions as to what is going to be preserved from the current structure. Um there are still a lot of details outstanding about the interior
construction and we will be working with those um throughout the permit process with the staff. Please let me know if you have any questions on this slide. happy to walk you through through any of it.
>> I I thought in the staff report uh that the one of the conditions was maintaining the pipe railing >> and is the owner um accepting of all of the staff report conditions?
>> Absolutely. They reviewed the report and they are in agreement with all of the conditions and recommendations and we look forward to working through those with staff. We love that railing. It's actually kind of instead of being
this way, it's kind of uh tilted. It's very interesting feature. Um any other questions in regards to what's going to be retained? We already went through that. There's our cute little house. Um, like I said, this is a fourth structure
that's very similar that we're working on. That's one side of the house. That's the rear. That's where the addition will go. Um, >> the homes that you own there, have you restored those? >> Well, those are not on the historic side
of the Grove. They're west of Douglas Road. >> Um, but they have all been restored. Um, we have two that are side by side that were once a duplex and then separated at some point and then we have another freestanding one on Thomas Avenue and they're all currently rented.
>> Okay. >> It's added quite a bit to that that part of the neighborhood. Um, this owner also owns a 14-unit building on Grand Avenue and Plaza. So, he's very much involved in >> in preservation of again the West Grove,
which we're losing daily. Um, >> it's gone. >> This plant, beg your pardon? >> I said it's gone. >> I know. [gasps] And they're taking our canopies, but I won't get into that right now. Um, this gives you a very good idea of the the setback, the entrance to the porch, the entrance to
the main home, which only has one bedroom. The idea for the addition is to provide a better living environment with a primary bedroom, a bathroom, a closet, and a large open kitchen. and then I won't bore you since I know
it's been a long afternoon, but if there's anything that you'd like me to address in my non-archchitecture capacity, here's the elevations. >> Again, please stop showing in the plans that the entirety of the building is being renovated. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay,
>> that's correct. As it was mentioned before that the structure, the home needs quite a bit of repair, but it's not unlike any of the other ones that we've worked on. They were all pretty much in the same condition. Um, these are the materials that are being proposed. I think we lost a little
color on the base color there, but it's kind of a buttery beige. The trim is kind of a greenish brown. Those are the shingles that are proposed for the existing structure and the addition roof and then aluminum windows and whatever
doors are are deemed appropriate for the home. And that's just a survey that snuck in there. Any questions I can answer for you or >> board? >> No. Okay, great. You're >> keep You're keeping your existing
canopy. You're keeping the existing canopy of trees that I see. I mean, that is our number one goal to make the house more livable. Um, but that is our number one goal is to keep the character of the
home um and to the extent that it contributes to the overall McFarland homestead division. Thank you very much. board questions of the AR the presenter
>> Miss Alvarez >> I don't know if she' be able to answer um I was just curious um are the would it be true wood sighting or Hardy board which I think is they're both good true >> you're going to need to come back up I think so they can so that your responses
will be on the record >> um your question was about was it Wood sighting. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. >> Miss Spain. >> No question. >> I have no questions. >> Miss Ever anything.
>> Do we know what type of wood you're using? >> What type of wood? >> I'm sorry. I do not, but I can get that information for the staff. over there. >> Can I say something? I wanted you guys to um I wanted to acknowledge Mr. Prime
who was here in the audience and I didn't know if if you wanted to speak at all. I mean, I know it's probably not public comment yet, but >> absolutely happy to have him. Okay, we need to It's for public comment. Uh hang on just a minute. We need to open this
up to the >> Was he sworn in? No, with he can do public comment without being sworn in, I believe. Okay. Mr. Silva, do you have a question? >> I'll wait for his comments. >> All right. Go ahead. >> I do.
Uh, good afternoon. Uh, members, this is the board staff. Um, in reviewing this, I'm glad that someone's taking care of the property and it's going to make it more habitable. We'll have more
residents in the um in the neighborhood. My only concern is that I always find out about these things almost after the fact, you know, noticing of whatever. And it's almost as if
those who went before us, who made that neighborhood on the national register, you know, they almost think as if we don't exist anymore. Yes, it's been over 40 years, but um we just try to stay vigilant. So, as far
as I can see, this is a good project. Um stays within the scope of the neighborhood and They keep that rail that's been there for as long as I've known it there. It's been for over 60 years. So, I believe
that we should do well, but in the future that more care be taken to notify the uh homeowners association or just members of the community and let them know what's going on. >> Thank you, sir.
>> Is the homeowners association noticed on variances? are they have their address um within the the district, right? So, they should be noticed. >> Any properties within the radius should
be noticed. Okay. >> I just putting that on the >> association is not a homeowner or a property owner. So, >> tenants are generally also notified as well. It's um who whoever the residence
itself is notified as well as the property owner. Sometimes those are not the same mailing address. >> Yeah. But the point is the um homeowners association unless they have an address in the district don't get notice.
What? What? That where is um isn't that where the homeowners associate association is also? Okay. So, they should have been notified appropriately.
>> Back to questions. Miss, >> what is the the circumfer circumference that's notified? I mean, if if this house is >> 18,000 foot radius. >> Wow. So, in that neighborhood, that'd be
a lot of homes that would be notified. >> And Mr. Prime, you didn't How did you find out about this meeting? Um, I drive the neighborhood, so I see the notices. I always check the uh city um
website, >> find out which meetings are going on here, there, and whatever. >> And I try to make sure that I check my mail to see if uh there's been any notices or anything. >> And you did not receive a not I mean, are you within the thousand feet, do you think?
>> Yes. Uh yeah, I live at 141 Florida Avenue. [laughter] >> I know where you live, so I know you're in I know you're in the district. [snorts] >> Yeah. So, um I don't know if it's clerical errors or anything. It's
probably, you know, there are many things that are placed down there. Maybe they don't have a correct address or another idea for what how they need to address it. But, you know, I would think that
especially with the um with the efforts of what my father did, they would at least remember that, hey, >> the Liby Walker Homeowners Association was responsible for getting that historic designation. >> Right. Right. Right. You know, I will
tell you, Mr. Prime, what what I do in the neighborhood that I'm in that is not a historic district. It's nowhere near as significant as the one that you will live in. I actually walk around and drive around and look for the the city signs uh because if there's particularly
in in your district um there may be a house that is having alterations done that doesn't require a variance and so then you wouldn't get a notice. Um >> uh typically all the demolitions in that
neighborhood are are um sent to the uh it used to be uh sent to the homeowners association are are notified of that. Um I don't know what happens anymore. I don't know whether that's u part of the code. Um, but there would be occasions
that you would not be notified and something would be happening in the area and and I'm very vigilant and and like you are in yours um because I just want to know what's going on and and for me
that's that's the easiest. I check my mail all the time and everything, but if if there's a little green sign in front of a a house, then I then I can call and find out what's going on. And that I do I do um make sure at least
every 10 days I've gone around each one of the strips. >> Yeah, that would be like you. [laughter] You're one of the good guys. >> Nice seeing you. >> Okay, board. Any further questions, discussions? >> Michael, there's someone else.
>> Oh, we've got Okay, just just a minute. I've got to move it here and then move to the to open that. Anybody here have any more questions for the presenters? Okay. If not, we're going to close that part of the board and open it to the public. Okay. So, we have people that would like to speak to the issue. Please,
have you been sworn in, sir? >> Okay, very good. Thank you. Please state your name for the record. Hello, my name is Koopa. I am the neighbor from across the street of that address. So, I'm 118. So, looking at the porch, uh, I had two questions. The first one is I was
curious to see the floor plan again if they were at all possible just out of morbid curiosity. >> Would you put that up, please? >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. There you go. >> Would you put it on the on the Yeah. >> On the board, please. I know that.
>> Oh, there you go. Lovely. So, this is the existing house. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> CGTV, could we have the presentation up, please? >> No. Um, >> yeah, let us put the presentation up. Or >> you could look at me and I'm holding it up. >> [laughter] >> No, here we go.
>> Okay, >> there you go. >> All right, sir. Your questions >> and my my uh so that was my first question. The second one is a remark or a comment that may lead into a question. I don't know if this is the right board to bring this up with, but considering
the fact that many of the properties in that neighborhood are made of wood uh and uh termite season is year round, um I did notice uh and after doing a little bit of research that uh the white lights on the street, so the LED, I don't know
if they're LED, they might be H hallogen, some kind of white light, they do draw in more termites than yellow lights do. And since LED lights can be programmed to be a yellowower tone, uh that may actually minimize the risk of drawing in termites in the neighborhood
and advanced preservation efforts for the neighborhood. So something worth considering. Right. I this is amateur research obviously, but uh worth looking into. >> Well, thank you very much. I think unfortunately the lights are controlled
by FPNL. Yeah, >> this board's been through that. >> Did you get a notice about this meeting? >> I looked across the street. I was having coffee and I looked across the street. I saw it. >> Okay. But you didn't get mailed notice. >> No, I didn't. No, no, no. But uh yeah, I
was just a nosy neighbor who got close to the property, just read the sign and there. All right, cool. >> Well, thank you very much. I appreciate we appreciate that. >> Expecting since May today. >> Okay. Okay. Is there anyone else that would wish to speak for against this? >> Is there anyone on Zoom?
>> No. >> We have no one on Zoom. So, we're going to close the public portion of the hearing again and come back to the board for uh action. >> Okay. >> I have a question. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Um who who sends these notices? Um is it
>> please? >> My question is who sends the notices to the homes in a thousand ft radius? Is that is that the historic department or is that >> the labels are provided by the applicant
um and the city prepares the notices and they're mailed out through our mail >> and and just to confirm because this property was actually on the last agenda as well. So there was notices mailed for the previous meeting when the item was
deferred and this meeting as well. So you mailed out two notices. >> Yes. >> And the property is posted physically on the site obviously is what that's why I think what they were saying had mentioned. So that's been up and then again the property is posted at the time
of the board of architects meetings. So it was also posted for BOA last week or two weeks ago as well. >> And just for the record, as I mentioned before, the code requires that the mailed notice be sent to the property address and as well as the mailing address on the Miami date property appraiser. Should that be a different
address? For instance, if there's an owner who's not occupying the building, so it goes to sometimes two addresses. >> Really? >> That's been a recent change. >> Yes, that's good. >> Mhm. >> Okay, ladies and gentlemen, and if there's no further discussion,
>> I think Mr. Prime wants to say something. >> I'm sorry. Please go ahead. I'm sorry. >> Uh, just one additional thing. Um it may not have been clear but um the notices for the meetings that went
for like the um board of architects the other parts we don't get a lot of those >> but as far as the historic department is concerned and public works they do send them out and we do see them but uh my concern is that it's not really
consistent but it does happen and that the uh historic department. They are on top of things. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Fine. >> That helps. >> That's good to know. >> I I think the board of architects don't the they do not mail out notices at all.
So, with the board of architects, it's only the sign uh in front [clears throat] of the house. >> Okay. Okay. Board, we're going to have uh there's going to be three motions on this the way we have it in the report. Okay. Uh, I'd like to have a motion,
please, for uh approve or denial. That's with number one. Do I have someone for a motion? >> I I'll move. Um, >> Mr. Silva. >> Sure. Um before before making the motion though, I would like to state for the
record that that um in terms of the variances which we haven't really discussed yet, I think they are absolutely justified and necessary in keeping with with the with the character of the district and the character of the building. So I'm in favor and my motion will reflect that.
Um, so I will move uh to approve the design proposal with the conditions noted in the staff report for the addition and alterations to the residence and site work on the property located at 118 Florida Avenue and approve the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness as
previously described. I will also incorporate uh in my motion approval of the variance to allow the residents to not provide a carport or port cusher. um uh and that
without providing off- street uh parking facilities or additional off- streetet parking facilities. Uh I will also include a motion to approve a variance to allow woodframe construction um which is a variance um from article 5
section 5-301 of the Coral Gable zoning code. >> Okay. So it's one motion. >> Yes. >> With three parts. Does everyone understand? Okay. I'd like a second, please. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Miss Spain is seconded. All right.
Would you please call the role? [clears throat] >> Miss Alvarez? >> Yes. >> Miss Rolando? >> Yes. >> Miss Ebert? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Bain? >> Yes. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Of course. Thank you. Motion
approved. And so move forward. I look forward to seeing this house in gorgeous condition. >> Thank you. It's a great neighborhood. >> Thank you, Mr. Pine, for coming and and sharing your information. I think it's really important. And thank you for your support.
>> I just wanted to say a quick thank you to Anna and her team who are absolutely wonderful and held by hand throughout this entire thing. So, thanks again. >> They're good team. Okay, we're going to move on to the last item and
that is item COA uh SP 2026-00006 and an application for the issuance of a special certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 410 Minorca Avenue, a local historic landmark legally described as lots 10 and 11, block 4, Coral Gable as section B,
platbook 5, page 111, Miami date county records. The application requests design approval and design approval for and addition and alterations to the residence and site work. May we have the presentation, please?
>> Yes. So, today we're going to be presenting a ready a designated home in 2024. Um, the 410 Minorca was permitted in March 1935 and it's one of the earliest homes built in Coral Gables during the New Deal era. It's contemporary
Mediterranean transitional style. It blends in with the neighborhood and currently shows characters of that characteristics without m with minor changes. Today the proposal that is being shown today um is a design approval for a second story addition to
the rear and onetory uh site addition with with alterations to the residence. Limited site work is also proposed. No variances are needed for this application and I do want to have a side note which is one of the requirements
but I do want you guys to take a look at it. Obviously we'll we'll know the the applicants um to a to try to maintain the configur the current configuration of the main entrance. That's >> okay. Put the presentation up.
Good afternoon. Please introduce yourself. >> There you go. What? >> Here we go. >> Good afternoon. My name is George Gonzalez um with Vertical Design. I'm the architect for the for the property representing the homeowners Mulki and Natalia Pini.
>> George, if you would please just there. Thank you. >> Okay. My name is George Gonzalez, Vertical Design Studio. I am the architect for the property. So this is the uh the existing residence. Um
>> Oh wow. As you can see on the renderings at the bottom or the perspectives in the bottom, our intent was to set back the addition and the alterations uh to still highlight uh the existing portion
of the of the residence. Uh we're only connecting at the rear and basically growing towards the rear. These are the existing uh photos of the residence as it sits today. Our intent
is to restore as much as as much as we can see on that original photograph. Uh the features, for example, we're planning on removing the the canopy on the on the front. We're planning on restoring the canopy on the right uh that you can see on the
on the fourth photo. And uh we have uh gone over the recommendations from staff and uh we agree with them. This is a on the left side you can see what's existing. On the right side you can see what's being proposed.
These are the elevations of the house and some sections. >> George, the the early photograph from 1935 shows a screen porch. >> There you go. >> Thank you for bringing that up. That's the the one point that uh in the
conditions u it was phrased as to consider bringing the screen porch back, but but the homeowners do not want to. But we are willing to make all of the other changes. That's pretty important. That's one of the very few chinwaserie
details that you'll see in any building in Coral Gables ever. In other words, it's kind of what we used to call Chinese chip and dale, you know. I I agree. But I have discussed this with a client and they're they really would like to stay away from the screen
porch. >> Okay. Thank you. >> But now it's just open, right? There's nothing there. >> Just they've taken it all out. It's just an open mall. >> No, no, it is currently open. >> Yeah. The the screen porch does not exist now. So, in our report, we were recommending that if it was considered
that we would work with them on the details. Um, >> okay. I have an issue with staff increasing the scope of work on any on any uh >> that's why it was a consideration >> because we cannot require it. >> And to Anna's point, the other thing is
that even the existing facade of the entrance is being modified. So, it's going from a single door to a double door when you enter. So if we look at the um the renderings versus the existing condition, >> right? >> We're willing to to revert or not do not
modify that opening. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. It's going so it's going to stay the original opening. >> Yes, we'll keep the original openings. We'll have the dimensional dimensional mountains uh the true two-piece as as tile and all of the other things that
were mentioned. the the only item that we would like to push back on is the screen porch. >> Bummer. >> And again, it was just a recommendation because there was some restoration work occurring at the property that we thought that it could be something that could be worked in um as part of an
advalorum application as well. So, >> must be $1,000 to do it. >> Okay. Board questions. I have to say I'm rather appalled by the massing and this it's like the addition that ate the house. Um it's
I understand the need for more space but I don't think it's very sympathetic. I I think the massing I I can appreciate what you're saying but I think the from a street point of view it is not as um it is not going to feel as um massive
because we have set it back quite a bit. So, a lot of care was taken into keeping the existing historical um structure highlighted with everything else set back and the twotory
edition at the very rear I think a good example would be the the the second column second uh perspective. >> It's overpowering. >> So what happened to the requirement that
they show existing and proposed on each sheet? Are we not doing that anymore or am I missing these are on there as existing and proposed? >> Yeah. So, >> it's in the plans. >> In the plans.
>> But what about the elevations? >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not using >> Speak to the microphone. >> No, I think in the glasses >> you're talking about the elevations. >> The elevations I thought were also submitted that way. So, this might have been an older application. So, this went to the BOA.
>> Okay. All right. I got it. >> Right. There you go. Um hadn't gotten to that. Okay, I get it. Perfect. Would you like to see if there's any
public comment while the board is Is there any consideration for screening for the um one-story edition >> screening as as in landscaping? >> So, in other words, you don't see it from the street. Um well, we have a um
>> we are proposing uh let me see if it's visible here. >> I'm looking at your your your site plan here. >> We are proposing a low property wall and certainly we could um we could have screening u vegetation screening.
>> This just overpowers the house. Would you consider not doing those decorative vents over the >> I mean this is a very small uh comment compared to the the size of the addition but um the decorative vents
over the archways so that it doesn't compete with those that are original to the house. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> I don't know. One question. Uh, the lot is 100 feet in the front. What's the What's the other
dimension? >> Let me go ahead. >> I have it. Sorry. 100 by 100. >> Thank you. >> That's quite a lot. >> When the homeowners purchased the property, it was not designated historic. Um, we basically through
conversations with the historic department, we offered it as a to be designated. Um, the the intent of the homeowner originally was to build a larger home >> to demolish this one.
>> Well, no, >> I don't know if demolish, but they were not constrained by historic um sensibilities. So this was designated in 2024 um and like a um >> as a result of of significance request.
>> No, no, they came to our office because they wanted to see again to learn what they can do with it because of the age of the property. I think for George it kind of triggered that likely you're going to have to see historic at some point. So why don't we go early? Right. >> And there was some massing studies, I think, done for a larger twostory
addition on that sideyard. Again, this is one of those conditions that's hard to develop, right? Because you have a double lot and a very small one-story house. So, really, a lot of the any modifications to it you do to it are are going to overwhelm it because of the
amount of green space that there is. So, developable property. Um, there was a much larger twostory at some at the early stages of this. I think there was multiple BOA um uh reviews on this one, maybe four times.
>> Yeah, three or four. >> Um on how to kind of, you know, play with the mass so that it didn't feel like this looming um big twotory edition and kind of breaking it up to have that one-story little courtyard space and and have the
twotory really set back to the edge of the property. Um I again I I I I hear your concerns and we had them too. Um and we also have to think of the balance of like because of
the size of the lot this could be >> much bigger. And again the property owners did come to us. They ended up agreeing to the the designation. They worked with that they worked that out with us two years ago and have been in the process since. Um, they were excited
because the chimney has that little W that they're restoring back and their last name happens to start with a W and it's in the historic photo. So, um, I I I hear you. Um, and if there's recommendations of maybe something that we could work on together to kind of
mitigate some of those things, we'll do that. And I think that the homeowners would would >> Did you discuss landscape screening and anything to hide this section on the the side? Well, I knew that they were doing >> you're getting overwhelmed by the second story already. Okay. And then you're add
then we're adding this large piece that that's almost the same size as the house over to one side even though it's set back. You know, there's a great opportunity to create that as a special private courtyard, you know, but where you couldn't see it too. I mean, as a landscape screen, which would then that
would help reduce the massing that that's being placed there. This is huge. It's really overpowering, >> but I hear but we hear you. >> Yeah. No, and we can work with them. Again, any conditions that are profered by you all can be added to the
recommendation today. Um, and if there's something that you all maybe wanted to come back to see, that is also an option, too. >> I I I hear what you're all saying. I think what we're all reacting to, George, is is is a circumstance not of your making, right? It's it's it's rare
that we see a lot this large with a house this small on it. Right. So by right they have certain amount of square footage they can build >> and if the owner wants to build a large addition which which they technically have the right to do. It's difficult to balance kind of all that with with the
size of house that there is. It's a one-story very small house. Um that being said >> I think the decision to put that twotory volume on the back was was the right one. Um, for sure. I'd rather see it back there than than in the sideyard. >> Yeah,
>> I I think we're all kind of on the same page about that. Um, the the only thing that that and and I understand why you did it, the the change in roof pitch, right? You're differentiating. So, the on that front facade in the one-story edition, you're differentiating the
pitch, which I get to differentiate the new edition from the old. Um, and the and then you're you're my my it's not even a concern. It's it's something that maybe we can further study with staff that front facade on the addition.
You're sort of mimicking the existing but changing it slightly. Right? Instead of the large arch, you've got kind of a traditional arch opening, smaller. The [snorts] the roof is is a lower slope. Um, you know, I don't know if maybe maybe changing that to to a hip would
would kind of alleviate the thing to make it more clear there there is a hip condition like a shed condition, but but um I think maybe that would would help things if number one that would sort of decrease the the visual height of that
addition, right? You're you're sort of if you put a hip on on that front, you're making it appear smaller than it is. um you're kind of not confusing things with that existing gable. Um and I think if you did that, maybe maybe
that would be something that that would help the project and would help us kind of >> that would help a lot. >> Yeah, >> that would be much better than just taking away the decorative uh >> that would that would I think help a lot. much better than just taking away the decorative inserts
>> because that would actually totally differentiate it. I mean, I'm not fond of two different arches on the uh on the front elevation myself, but you know, >> because I I I think the historic
uh existing historic home with that large arch should be the main focal point. Um, and this other arch just confuses the issue. So >> that's why >> for me for me I take away the arch also and put it in >> we also had that sensibility. It's it's just that they're both facing the street
and just to have a square opening >> seemed like 1980s clashing with a >> well not really >> 1930s. No >> but for me for me I I think it would help but I don't want to you know start designing. And that's my reason for
screening it, just to take away that that blocky side. Okay. Anyway, board, we're on our last Miss Evers, any comments, questions,
suggestions, recommendations, denials, approvals, or indecisions? The original square footage of the uh n the the old house. What is it? N whatever. Um was what? >> 1935.
>> Yeah. 1935. >> That square footage is what? And we're going to what I mean it it's amazing. Yeah. >> It is 1,700 ft. 1718.
>> Okay. and and the new structure will be >> the foot basically it's doubling the the the size of the footprint. >> And what is and what is the maximum F allowed on that site? >> Yeah. >> So maximum allowed is 4150. We're at 419
>> and you're at 415. We're at 4,9 the maximum is 41 4,150. >> Basically more than doubling it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> But you know they're allowed to do that by right. >> Yeah. >> Just how to do it. Yeah. >> You know. >> Okay.
>> This received the 10% increase from BOA. It >> it did, but uh we only needed it for the outdoor terraces. >> Okay. So I have a question. I know you went through several iterations. Um but some other projects we saw today um
>> they asked for a variance. >> Yeah. Can you get closer Anna? So >> they asked for a variance in the back. I guess maybe what we're struggling all struggling with is that some of the successful addition projects they either have a like a hyphen addition or there's
some kind of transition from the the existing volume to the taller proposed volume. Was there an opportunity to build closer to the back property line? Because right now I think um Marlin's first comment was that it's almost like
engulfed >> right the existing house. So there's no way to gain more dens. >> No, I know. But we saw some examples where there was a variance to get closer.
The twotory edition portion actually starts behind the existing house. >> No, no, I I see that. >> Yeah, I know. When you look at the floor plan, it's just one kind of large mass. Yeah. >> Um
I Well, I I don't think the request was there at some point. I think he was trying to actually make the changes so that he complied with the zoning because we were concerned of pushing for a variance that maybe wasn't doing it any favors because
it's not that it would make it bigger but well right you still have to meet the requirements. I don't know if there was enough space. If they're at the max at that 10 ft now, would 5t really? >> Okay. It's just a question. And I I
don't agree with the change in the roof pitch. I think it >> I don't know. I think it throws it off >> for that front room. >> Mhm. [snorts] >> The existing roof pitch is very very steep. It's like nine and nine inches in a in a foot.
>> Mhm. Um we [snorts] our original design did mimic the the original house even even more. Um but uh we understood that we had to >> yeah the existing >> yeah BOA had been the one to recommend
actually to change the arch type at one point. Um I don't remember if you had a proposal with a pitch at that to match the existing. So there's multiple iterations of this over time. So
>> or something in between. It feels very different from the house. Um I think vegetation screening is a great idea for the for the east portion of the of the addition. I would be >> I don't think we can rely on on
vegetation, >> right, >> to cover up an addition. >> Well, I mean, it's set back. I mean, look at it. It appears to be set back about 20 ft. >> I get it. I understand. >> I hear you. But if it's, you know, everybody's got these big green walls, you know, that of vegetation.
>> I understand. But I think we need to base our uh determinations on the architecture or not on whether they have a bush in front. >> I'm hearing you. I'm trying to ameliorate. >> Yeah. >> Why don't Why don't we try a motion and let's see see how it goes.
>> Let's go. Okay. Let's do that. So we Well, wait a minute. Okay. We Let's Before we get to the motion, we've got to go through the procedure. Okay. Is there any are there any other questions that we want to have with the architect right now? Hearing none, we're going to close that and ask the public. Is there
anyone here that wishes to speak for or against this? Is there anyone on Zoom? We're going to close the public portion and come back to the board for a motion. Okay, here we [snorts] are. >> Okay. So, I I will make I will make a motion to approve
the s the application of design proposal for an additional alterations to the residence and site work on the property located at 410 Minorca Avenue with staff conditions and an additional condition to study the
the one-story portion of the addition and look at a hip roof in that area. and altering that that arched opening as well. >> I second that. >> I'd like to amend that motion and add
that they add screening to the a large landscape screening and maintain that screening. >> Could you repeat that, Michael? >> I'm sorry. I said, I'd like to add to that that they add a large to that side
in front of that addition that they add a large landscape screening that would screen it. I don't mean a low wall. I mean a high wall legal whatever is legal for the top of a hedge or that kind of
thing. Something that screens it out. >> A land a landscaping screen. >> A landscaping screen. Yeah. Not a wall. Do >> you accept that, Mr. Solar? >> I do. >> I don't. So, someone else will. >> Now, we need a second.
>> We'll need another second. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. M. Rolando has seconded. >> Okay. >> Miss Alvarez. [clears throat] No. >> Miss Ebert. >> Yes.
Mr. Silva, >> yes. >> Miss Rolando, >> no. >> Miss Spain. >> Only because of the landscaping? No. >> Mr. Maxwell? >> Yes. Motion fails.
>> Is there another motion to be made? >> They're still not going to get there yet. >> Well, we can try Let's try the motion without the landscape requirements. Understood. So that's approving with the staff conditions and the condition about the hip roof and the one-story building.
>> And I would like to offer staff recommendation to re bring back the the screening at the front the front curve if it will help >> the restoring the screen porch. You're saying as as a mandatory condition. >> Yeah.
>> I will accept that. I'll I'll revise my motion to include that. >> I'll second that. Okay, we have a motion on the table. Would you please call the role? >> Miss Alvarez? >> No. >> Miss Rolando?
>> No. >> Miss Ever? >> Yes. >> Mr. Silva? >> Yes. >> Miss Bane? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Maxwell? >> I'll say yes, but the motion fails. [clears throat] We we only have six
people. You have to have five to pass. >> Can can we motion to continue the item? >> So the item would automatically be continued to the next meeting until a majority vote is achieved which was five required. >> Okay. >> And the full complement of the board is
nine. >> Okay. So the item would be continued um to a date certain of the August meeting and if it's not that August meeting um we would appropriately renotice etc >> or September.
>> Is he going to have enough time to to go for the to put it in with August or Sep? >> Well if it's just continued and there's no changes to the proposal then >> okay >> it would be able to be scheduled for August. But if he wants to take into consideration the comments that were given today,
>> I won't be here in August. I'm just letting you know. So you're going to have, you know, >> possibly eight >> instead of nine. >> No, it's actually early 13th. >> All we need is five. >> I understand. But he needs to know. >> So just for the record, this item will
be continued to the August 13th, 2026 meeting um for further consideration unless deferred to another date. But for the public watching, August 13th. >> Okay. Thank you. Well, that concludes that. I'm sorry. You know, we'll look
forward to seeing you come back. >> Thank you very much, >> ladies and gentlemen. That concludes the items that were on our agenda. Is there any old business? >> We do have one more item on the agenda under new business, I believe. Oh,
>> apologies that that was a mistake. >> Oh, okay. Then we have concluded. >> Okay. Do we have any old business, Miss Paris? >> I'm a grant application. Oh, no. Oh, this is new business, I guess. Sorry. Should I wait for new business?
>> Okay. Do we have any new business? Um, so in Natalie's first month, she did work on a Florida State grant application for the Coral Gables Museum building for the restoration of the exterior stone masonry work and some interior spaces also that have incurred
some damage and um, so cross your fingers for us. Um, that application was submitted on Monday and that would be funding for next July. >> A year and a half from now. Yeah. Yes,
>> North Study. >> North Study should be coming for you. Staff has been reviewing. I just actually got comments from Natalie, too. And um Karen Elizabeth have had it also for review. Um and then we'll have after this summer in the fall because um uh Megan is out of town. She's our
consultant. She's leaves for the summer, so she's not here now to present, but she'll come back in the fall. >> Would it be appropriate to send the board a draft just for just to look at? >> We could. >> That would be nice. I think we all >> in advance. It's a It's a big document. It's about 400 pages. It's a lot of
photos, right? Because of the inventory, but >> but you've got it all digitized and everything. >> Yes, we could share it with the board. >> I think that would really be good. It would just give us all a little heads up. That's all. >> Yep. And if there's any comments in advance that we can share, that would be good, too. So that way we don't have to It's It would be thorough. >> I think we're all happy to do that.
We've all been very excited about this coming along. edited >> uh Megan's last name Mlullen. >> Okay. >> It's from PL Serbia >> is our consultant. >> Great.
>> Yeah. >> Uh okay. We've got the Columbus Street project. >> Oh no, that was the mistake. Sorry, that was an error. >> Okay. Um is there anything else? Um they actually do there was something that has come up a lot lately um for the
replacement of original wood doors. So we just need to we need to start thinking about replacement materials because we've had in the last month obviously everyone comes with there's humidity, heat, rain, and everyone's wood doors swelling up and hurricane
season. And then the same thing happens with a lot of the roof tile conditions. Why are you making me do S tile or the barrel tile and it cost double and what are you doing to us? You don't want people to live in this neighborhood and uh you're trying to kick out the I got we got I was threatened with I'm trying
to kick out uh the elderly from their homes for requiring a two-piece barrel tile. So, I just want you all to know the efforts that staff puts in to just get through a roof replacement permit sometimes. And the same thing's going to
happen. We we we get less push back for the front doors, but um and usually they're able to maintain them because again it's one opening, everything else is impact. Just shutter it, please. And they kind of work with us. Um some people do not want to do that. They're looking showing us composite materials
as metal materials. So um we've made some mistakes. I will say I made one mistake that I can have know now I would not ever approve again but unfortunately it exists luckily in a recessed porch condition
>> there are streets I can't drive down because of the >> administrative >> you know you have to we have to give them the opportunity and it was one that now I know and I have said it in the email back to them after the final inspection I would never approve this product again
>> what what was the material and I just out of curiosity >> it was an aluminum No door. It was a Yeah. impact door. Um so just keep that in mind as you know I there was a a design the shipo had a a a
CLG training the other day about secretary of interior standards replacement materials appropriate changes to buildings things like that. So I know that we sent you the link. I think they share the PowerPoint afterwards. We're happy to do that too. and I'll try to include you all in those
CLG trainings because the as board members you are um invited to attend. >> Yeah, we we've received all those notices. Is there any update on the city hall? >> City hall is progressing right now. Um they are at 75% construction documents
working on the 100% for I think this week or next week. um they're put moving forward with the um inventory and the relocation of all the historic furniture and all the items that are being cate cat cataloged in order to come back to city hall. So
that's should be that move should happen hopefully next week. There was a change in the procurement stuff that we had to do in order to get the right company and the contract for 3 years. Um and then um there'll be permits and hopefully work
starting by fall >> truly starting. There's been investigative work happening over time and >> well then it's got to go out. Has there been any thought to preserving windows in storage? In other words, >> in where? Don't get me started on
>> Oh, [laughter] >> in other words, saving windows and storing them or giving them to the historic museum or something else, at least one of each kind. >> I'm sure that we can figure out maybe one that can be
>> properly restored and saved in as we'll figure something out so that we've got profiles and things like that. So when when the steel rusts out, which it will, I don't care what kind of coating you've got on it. We can replace the windows as they should be. And the front doors,
what's happening with the front doors? [laughter] >> The front doors are right now being proposed to be replaced with impact rated wood product. >> Oh my god. You know there, >> you know, there's an an argument that I had with people when they would come in
and and say that they want to replace their their front door is there's something very elegant about an in swinging door. I can't remember in city hall, but in residential, you know, there's something you're not smacking someone with the door [laughter] >> to enter your home >> coming in. When I lived on Santa Maria
Street, that door swung in. It was so cool. you know, now I'm in a townhouse that I absolutely love, but but it swings out onto this little area that I have to figure out how to to get the groceries in or whatever if I'm coming in. >> And so it's it's a hu isn't just the
materials. It's it's the actual >> entry um you know, feeling that you have. I've I've pushed multiple times because the doors are have kind of been second in conversation. the focus is really still is still the windows and the details of
those windows. Um, and I I will continue to say that I think that we can shutter those six door openings that there are because there's not that many door openings actually on the exterior of the building. >> So, I will continue. >> Yeah. And they're very accessible, right? They're right. They're very
argument against not not putting the was all the labor that it takes like this. This is a different >> Yeah. And you could do the Kevlar screenings. You don't have to do the big metal panels. There's ways to There's options out there. Now, >> am I able to make a motion to encourage the city to keep the original doors on?
I I know I'm getting glared at [laughter] >> you. You can make that recommendation in the minutes >> to encourage the the the city to keep the original um exterior doors uh in city hall.
>> Yes. and and restore them that not just the ones on the front first floor because there's that old balcony. >> Yeah, those are the other there's four there. >> Any exterior door should be kept retained and restored. How about how about something like retain restore
reuse in s in situ and provide hurricane protection in addition >> I think they'll provide hurricane uh protection regardless >> and they'll say you know seal the building >> yes >> anyway >> I'm I'm what whatever you want
>> okay we've got a motion on the table folks >> I'll second that motion >> we have a second by Mr. Silva, would you call the role, please? >> Miss Alber, >> yes. >> Mr. Silva, >> yes. >> Miss Rolando,
>> yes. >> Miss Spain, >> yes. >> Miss Ebert, >> yes. Mr. Maxwell, >> absolutely. >> October. >> I'm hoping Anyway, we're off the record now. Okay. Are there any city commission items, ladies and gentlemen? Do we need other
than that that motion there which will go to the city commission? I believe >> if so that's my understanding was a re just a recommendation to be included in the minutes. If it's requesting action from the city commission then if that's what your request is, we would put that on as requesting action. I
didn't understand it that way, but if it is, we can certainly >> it could be presented to the city manager. And if you want it to go before the board, the commission, then it's a different process. Someone would have to attend the commission meeting to present that to them. >> So the items that go on the commission
are items requesting action from the city commission. Um I understood this is a recommendation to staff, but however you all would like to phrase it is is how we will deal with it. >> I I meant it to be for staff. >> Understood.
Um, we actually are meeting before our next commission meeting. We don't meet until late August. So, um, >> yeah. So, I could come back to you with any feedback. >> Is there any time sensitive? When when are they when are they making that decision
>> for the doors and windows? >> Yeah. >> I mean, not have to over the windows. That's already passed. [laughter] Um, I I don't know if there's a time line for that, but we don't they haven't even We've been so focused. because they've been so focused on the details of the windows and how to get those profiles
right that the door product has kind of been secondary to it. But the idea was that the new proposal was always going to be a wood product um that was impact rated. >> Are there any other discussion items board? Anything else that you wish to
discuss, thrash around or be feudal with? If not, we'll call for adjournment. Do I have a motion? So moved. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Recording stopped.