hey everyone Please take your seats The meeting is about to begin Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record Please stand by We are going on
air in 5 4 3 2 1 Good morning and welcome to the April meeting of the design review board Um we have a fairly short agenda today I'm sure we're going to get through everything Um we do have one member
absent today Uh but it means that for any variances there needs to be a unanimous vote So okay Um let me start off by taking attendance and I'll do a roll call for that Um so Miss Bhutakabali here Mr Mr Defender is
absent Miss Giller Nelson here Mr Lester here Miss Leuen here Mr Pis present Pres We do have a quorum We have five members present Thank you And then I'll turn it over to the city
attorney All right Good morning everyone Today's meeting of the design review board has been scheduled in a hybrid format with a quorum of the board physically present in the city commission chambers at the Miami Beach City Hall and applicants staff and members of the public appearing either in person virt or
virtually via the Zoom platform webinar In order to participate in today's meeting those wishing to participate via the Zoom platform webinar may dial 888-475-4499 which is a toll-free number and enter the webinar ID which is 82273941924 or log into the Zoom app and
enter the webinar ID which again is 82273941924 Any individual wishing to speak on an item must click the raise hand icon if they're using the Zoom app or dial star 9 if they're if they're participating by phone Now before I I will swear in those who will be testifying today I'm going
to read into the record the city's notice regarding lobbyist information and registration If you are appearing on behalf of a business a corporation or another person you need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office If you haven't registered yet you should register before you speak to the board
You don't have to register as a lobbyist in three limited circumstances Number one if you're speaking only only on behalf of yourself and not any other party Number two if you're testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific technical or other specialized information Number three if
you're appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any compensation or reimbursement for your appearance to suppress to to express support of or opposition to any item Expert witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall still prior to
appearing disclose in writing to the city to to the city clerk their name address and the principal on whose beha on whose behalf they're communicating If you're an architect attorney or employee representing an applicant or an objector you must register as a lobbyist Uh now if everyone who intends
to testify today please stand and uh raise your right hand And uh if we have any if we have any virtual speakers they will be sworn in at the time of their testimony Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you that you'll be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Right Thank you Madam Chair You may proceed Excellent Thank you very much Let us begin with the um approval of the minutes from last month So moved
Motion by Mr We have a second Second Second by Miss Luen All those in favor I I Any opposed Motion passes Okay I see there's no continuences or withdrawals We will go on to new applications Um DRB
241030 8 9 and 10 Century Lane This application has been filed requesting design review approval for the construction of a new fivetory single family home including one or more waivers and a var and variances from the minimum required rear setback for a
swimming pool from the minimum required side street setback and from the maximum lot aggregation to replace existing residences Okay So just uh for the history on April 4th 2023 uh the design review board approved uh a project at 8th Century
Lane and a project at 10 Century Lane uh for the construction of a new five-story single family home on each of those sites Um and building permits were never issued for for those approvals Um the applicant has uh now filed a different proposal which is here before you today
Um the site uh is in the it's on the north side of Bell Isle It's in the RM1 district Um the combined lot size is 10,229 square ft Uh they're proposing uh a floor area of
12,787 and that is square feet and that is at 1.25 that is the maximum F allowed in this district in the RM1 district Um they're proposing a height of 54 feet 11 inches and the maximum height in the area is 55 feet Um the
um design uh the so the applicant is proposing to aggregate three parcels 8 9 and 10 Century Lane They are requesting a variance for that I will I will get to that in a moment Um they're proposing a single family residence that's um five stories tall uh on the site Um it is in
the RM1 district So this height limit is allowed in the district Um the residence is designed in a contemporary styled Um it has uh the staff report describes it as a brutal as having brutalist influences It's more of a contemporary design of a home There are some minor
brutalist influences but it's primarily a contemporary styled home Um the design is very advanced Um the materiality incorporates uh draping plants green roofs voided spaces which soften the structure um and and introduce some visual interest Um the applicant is requesting two design waivers The first
waiver pertains to the maximum lot coverage Um the maximum uh lot coverage on the subject property is 45% and the applicant is proposing uh 50% given the irregular shape of the lot Staff is not opposed to the granting of that variant of that of that waiver It's not a
variance Um and it didn't um um and the the irregular shape and the narrowness of the lot to justify that waiver request Um the other waiver that they're request that they're requesting uh relates to the uh minimum height required for the for the first story Um
the code requires 12 feet above the designed flood elevation However it the code does allow the DRB to wave two feet So they're reducing that to 10 feet um above the design flood elevation So that's not from grade that's from u the design flood elevation in this case is
10 Um so there's still a lot of room in that in that first floor area There is no habitable space So staff is not opposed to the granting of the of that waiver Um this under it's the understory is for parking uh uh usable spaces for the family to use but it's not really a
habitable space where where there's living areas Um so staff is not opposed to the granting of that waiver Um there the applicant is requesting three variances Staff um does have some concerns with the granting of the variances Um um and I'm going to
describe those and as a result of these concerns that we have staff does recommend that this application be continued to the June meeting um to allow for some modifications Um the first uh concern that we have relates to the connector bridges Um essentially the
the the design is is in two masses one on lot 8 one on lot 10 and then in in the middle there's um um a connector bridge that essentially connects these two sides And this allows the applicant to have a single elevator and and
staircase uh across this span Um staff does have concerns that that that that space these connector we're calling them connector bridges um creates an imposing nature on the property um um that can negatively impact the surrounding view
surrounding properties impact view sight lines Um and so staff does recommend that these connector bridges be limited to floors um one and two and that um so you can have an enclosed connector on the first floor on the ground floor an
open air covered connector on the second floor and staff recommends that everything above that remain open Um this divi this will divide the massing um and and and open up uh open up view corridors in the area Um the second uh change that staff is recommending is
that there's an open staircase on the rooftop on level five um that has a covered area Staff recommends that that covered area be step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step set step back five feet Additionally staff recommends that additional landscaping including tall trees and low shrubs be provided between the proposed house and
the existing one-story home at 7 Century Lane Um the landscaping should be placed in front of the proposed walkway on the ground floor uh and then on the ground floor in front of the ground floor elevator and utility room areas in order to provide appropriate screening and soften the visual mass to the neighboring property Additionally staff
recommends that a window be provided on the south elevation of the enclosed garage similar to the round window located on the ground floor uh ramp to break up the wall and provide additional transparency Um and so with those recommendations staff uh does believe that the the
appearance of the home will be enhanced um and minimizing the imposing nature of the home uh towards adjacent properties In regards to the variances the applicant as I said is requesting three variances The first variance is to reduce by 3'2 in the minimum required
setback of 7'6 in for a pool uh from the water's edge Um and they're proposing to construct a pool with a setback of 4'4 in Um staff is not opposed to the granting of this variance um for the pool Um because of the narrow nature of the lot the the minimum required
setbacks from the rear of the home Um it does represent a practical difficulty to the applicant um and and it should not negatively impact the the surrounding properties the the location of the pool The second variance is um is
related to the the side facing a street setback Uh the applicant is requesting to reduce by 3 feet 4 inches the minimum required side facing a street setback of 10 feet in order to construct a portion of the structure at 6'8 in from the side street setback This is for the area
where the connector bridges are located Um it primarily relates to some uh planters that will be encroaching into the setback Um but overall staff has concerns with this structure in general Um so in order to um um to support the
granting of this variance staff does recommend that the that the height of those bridges be reduced to those two levels as I described previously Uh because the granting of this variance can create um um an imposing structure that can negatively impact the surroundings Um the third variance
relates to the lot aggregation Um they're proposing to aggregate a third lot when the code provides for a maximum lot aggregation of two lots Um given that these are irregular small lots um these the three lot aggregation is less
than what you could aggregate with two standard lots So it does represent a it could potentially represent a practical difficulty on the applicant However staff is not supportive of this variance at this time given the the proposed design and the potential impacts um to
the surrounding properties Um so staff does recommend that the application uh be continued in order to further refine the design uh to minimize those impacts Um so with that staff recommends that the item be continued to the June 12th 2025 meeting so that the applicant can revise the proposal as as detailed Um
and that's our that's our recommendation Thank you As the applicant begin thank you Good morning Um my name is Tracy Slavvens My address is 3800 Northeast 1st Avenue Sweet 200 I'm joined by Brian
Pravda and Elizabeth Vandeluin from our architecture and landscape architecture team along with Elizabeth Bueno who's our project manager Um you have seen eight and 10 century before Um and you know that at the time my client um
designed two homes and one was intended to be their main house and one was going to serve as a guest house for their extended family and friends and guests um in that time um the they were able to acquire 9th century which is the property in between the two lots So we
went back to the drawing board and came back today with a redesign of the site to have one cohesive home to service this family of six um that they are expecting their fourth child very soon So you know their their needs have changed since we were last here Um we
acknowledge that staff is recommending a continuence and we're going to continue to work with staff but we wanted to make our presentation to you today so that we could get your feedback as well and make sure that as we think about how to make these changes to the structure that we
have your input So um with your um consent um m Madam Chair we'd like about 20 minutes to walk you through the design and just the justifications for this application and then take your feedback with us um to hopefully come
back on the June or possibly July agenda So I know that we're going to have a lot of questions and discussion Maybe keep it to 15 minutes and then that'll also you know because I don't know if you're necessarily going to address the spec there's going to be questions
regardless if you wouldn't mind Yes we'll do our best So um on the screen you can see um Bell Ale and the outlined in red although I guess on where I'm looking there's captions but are the three lots and as you can see they're
they're L-shaped and there's a connector that we call it uh between 9th century and 8th century lane that's only about 28 feet wide So it's very difficult to design a structure around this very irregular lot shape And and I think you
know if you think about what the primary lot is here it's 8th Century Lane because it's the waterfront So no matter what you know eight and nine would probably connect um in the configuration of a design of these properties Um here's a zoning map
So you can see that this lots are zoned RM1 which is a multif family district It allows 60 units per acre Um so 14 units could fit on these lots Um the maximum height is 55 and the F is
1.25 Um for context Bell Ale is you know predominantly 90% multif family There's about,00 units developed on Bell Isle We have the Standard Hotel that was recently approved for five-story condominium building The Kabad is
located on Ferry Lane at its south end and there are about 16 single family homes remaining today Three of which are owned by the applicant and those are shown in yellow This is the Vista's condominium which is on the west side of the street
It's a 58 story 58 foot tall apartment building with 48 units Um the approval of this um original design was done in the 90s It's built on seven platted lots and it received variances for both setbacks and height in order to be built
at that time So for context more on the street I pasted together you know the best I could what happens when you look down Century Lane and you can see the Vista's condo takes up the entire west side of
the street Um 11 Century Lane is a recently completed home that's also a five-story home Um and 8 9 and 10 Century Lane are adjacent to 11 There is one other house 7 Century Lane that's on the waterfront and we can talk about
that in a few minutes So this is the design of the standard to give more context The new addition to the standard which is shown in the middle of the screen at the top is approximately 70 feet tall And these are the elevations for the new building for the
standard waterfront elevation of that as well So I mentioned that previously we were here um in 2023 for approval of eight and 10 century lanes Um some of the variances that we're asking for today were approved already then which
included um the variance for the pool setback and the waiver to allow us to reduce the first floor height by 12 feet to 10 feet This is what they looked like um you had two separate houses and then
in the middle between the two was a bungalow home at 9 Century Lane which has since been acquired by the applicants So today we're here with um our two waiver requests and variance requests which Roelio uh kindly um
defined for you Um these are you know um I think the most reasonable given the very odd shapes of the lot um most of them relate to the the odd configuration which require us to have setback variances but the most important
variance here today is the allowance of the three aggregation of the three lots Um because of the nature of the design and the intent of the owners to have their single family home on these properties You know without that variance we have no project Um and as
staff mentioned you know what we're asking for is well within reason of what's allowed by right in RM2 The as he as Roelio said the minimum lot size in RM2 is 5600 square feet Our lots range in size from 2600 square feet to about
3,000 square feet And so when you aggregate them together we get to about 10,200 square feet which is about 1,000 square feet less than what would be allowed by right in RM1 Um so with that I'm going to turn over
um to Brian Pravda our project architect to walk you through the plans Thanks Tracy Good morning everyone Thank you for your time today Really appreciate it And um first I just want to give you a little background on myself so you know who's talking to you why I'm here and give some history on
the project Um and also I I want to sincerely ask for your um for your ear to listen to what we're presenting today uh without preconceptions um to you know what you might might think So I I appreciate that So like you said my name
is Brian Um been an architect now for about 20 years Been working at the beach for about 20 years Uh been working since internship for about 30 years Uh my specialty is in health and wellness OLAP and I care I'm very passionate about
health and wellness for uh occupants and then also for the community as a whole and you'll see that in the design today Um and I'll go ahead and get into the design So as you can see here these are the parcels and I want to emphasize
these are three unders sized parcels They do not meet the code definition for lot or they do not meet the code definition for lot Uh the city's code defines lot you can see here as meeting the minimum area and size requirements
for the zone and these parcels undersized parcels do not meet that definition So even asking for a variance for this I understand the city would like us to legally uh I contend is not even required With that said I want to um point out here that when you
aggregate these three undersized parcels you are bringing this property into conformance with the code Right now you have three non-conforming parcels and by aggregating these you will bring it into conformance Um and I'll be very
straightforward My goal here today is to get unanimous approval of this I think without question it should be Uh next year we have the uh lot coverage which is one of the uh waiverss that we're requesting The code has no
lot coverage requirement for lots that are under 65 ft wide And this configuration you know combining these three undersized parcels takes three lots that are less than 65 ft wide The
way that city staff had interpreted this is they viewed it as having two different um parcels One on the 8th century side that is less than 65 ft wide and that is the way that all the setbacks and everything else was
established So for essentially half of the property there's no lot coverage requirement at all It could be 100% on the other side with combining these two underside parcels the width exceeds 65
ft with the way it's interpreted and so that is the reason we're asking for a waiver up to 50% which if you see can read the notes in here at the bottom um when we were first starting this been working this for about 2 years was working with Michael Baluchia at the time said he absolutely no problem with
that and encouraged this um there was also some different interpretation with the odd lock configuration um where's the width where's the front where's the back and I can tell you if you turn for example that parcel on the right the other way which one
interpretation that was given by staff was where it says rear where there two rears on this property So uh but on the north side you can see it says rear One interpretation from staff was that should be considered an interior side not a rear uh which would uh allow us to
build even more And when you take that width if you took it the other way it would actually be 68 feet wide as opposed to in this direction So I think this waivers very reasonable um and uh should be approved And then next I want to talk
about the pool setback This is one of the variances that we're asking for Uh as mentioned this this was approved in the past And you can see here if you look at the dashed line above the pool about half of the pool is underneath the house because this is such a small
property Um and this is just to give a little bit of sun while you're in the pool and imposes on no one It faces the water beyond our separate permit There will be a dock And so I think this is very reasonable and should also be approved And then next I want to talk
about the waiver for the height As you can see here it's a blown up detail So the the way the code reads is it has the minimum uh height at 12 ft to the underside of the slab When you have an under story the purpose of that is you
know for flood consideration You don't want the floor to flood Um and I wanted to show this detail here If you look at the bottom right kind of the black lines the underfloor the underside of the slab is actually just 4 in below that maximum
We then have a thickened slab edge which could be considered a beam uh at the planters So whether they actually even need this waiver you know it's questionable It's open to interpretation as far as a thickened slab edge versus a beam But out of caution we said let's
ask for the waiver it's been approved before and this is to keep the height as low as possible with consideration to the neighbors And then um the variance here want to show the street side setback So
if you look I'll call it the pinch point where if we followed the uh setbacks to the letter of the law you have 5 foot 10 in where you can build That's it 5 foot 10 in wide Um so this definitely meets
the the whole purpose of being able to grant variances as far as having a hardship And all we are asking for if you look is the habitable space which is the the corridor between is within that setback All we're asking for is for this
overhanging planter for the benefit of the community So you have overhanging plants and green space for that to just barely jut out and that itty bitty space And if you look back for example at the vistas it's very common um their
balconies overhang the setbacks It's very common to have overhangs eyebrows planters and balconies past the setbacks And that's all we're asking for And now I'll kind of walk through the plans This is the the ground floor
And I'll say when we say a fivetory building I'm just trying to be straightforward and honest with you which is why we say that Technically this is an unders understory So it's not even a floor of the building Um as you'll see one of the concerns that was brought by neighbors in the past and I
want to mention I went back and I listened to every hearing on 8 and 10th Century Lane Listen to all the neighbors concerns everything the board members said and took that into account with this design So one of the concerns that was raised was traffic and congestion
and parking And if you see a large portion of the site now is used to where the corner of these lots has a circle drive And one of the things if you look at this in context this is a deadend street And right now with the previous
design for example you'd have to pull in and then back out into the street and it creates a hazard and it's hard to turn around in that area and people park in the street Especially today's world when you get deliveries and mail they just park in the street and create congestion
We are using a large portion of the site for a circle drive to ease that congestion and allow for parking So if you look at this uh you know area here you have the Circle Drive garage and then you have to go up for the flood
elevation a staircase up to the top and then a walkway with an elevator and there's one toilet room one bathroom and then you know the the waterfront It's very minimal There's a lot of green
space uh when you look at the the first level and then when you go up one level this is essentially the family's living space And so you have on the one side the kitchen living and dining and I'll
show you a rendering of that This is apartment sized I mean it's actually smaller than most apartments Um and then you go to the other side of the house you have the amenities for the home a place to hang out uh a gym basically a TV room because there isn't space for a
TV on the other side um and uh sauna and things like that As I mentioned my focus is on health and wellness and that's you know healthy to do So this is for their the inhabitants healthy habit And while I'm you know looking at this I just want to mention because one of the things
that obviously was brought up by city staff was um I'll call it the corridor And I just want to directly address that That was uh a recommendation from city staff and was has been worked on for months with city staff I'll talk about
that that more in a bit Um as you go up one level uh to the third floor these are the children's bedrooms So if you see here only two bedrooms fit on one side and then on the other side there are three more As Tracy mentioned the
four children one guest bedroom or a room for Yeah a room for a parent Sorry Keep going Now how many how much more do you have It seems like you have a lot more to address I I do I'll Is that okay I
apologize Yeah I mean again we're gonna ask questions So yeah but this is informative Okay Um I'll try to go faster I apologize So this is the family level And as you can see here even to get to their kids you know they need to go across this
glass area So going upstairs this is the master suite level So or primary So you have a bedroom closets which are important uh minimal size bathroom and then there's room basically for a desk
and a home office And I want to point out also I'll just speed through Um all of the exterior living space and how far set back the massing is If you look at this you know 20 ft from the street and then another it's actually about 17 ft
cuz you have the planter and another So it's like 40 feet set back Um I honestly don't know any other client that would accept this Uh on this other side here you know again it's about 50 to 60 ft
set back from the property line on a lot that is less than 65 ft So half of this is already set back Um and I just wanted to point out real quickly on the first floor for example all of the utilities
are within the footprint which again I don't know anyone else that would do this Uh this is so excessively respectful and sensitive to the neighbors Uh the the trash the recycling the electrical panels air conditioning is all the pool equipment the the water
equipment is within the footprint It's typically you know you're allowed to have it only 5 ft set back from the property line This isn't This is within the footprint of the building Again as you go up you'll notice how the the building stepped in And that was in response to the comments that are made
on the previous projects This building doesn't go straight up It tears in and you know the one place where the comets are in the middle which I'll talk about uh in a bit Finally the roof So this is where the condensing units are And if
you notice here so this is the top roof You have the air conditioners They're accessed by a roof hatch Typically as you can see with what all the neighbors do uh is you have the staircase lead up to the top You'll have an elevator go up
to the top and the massing is much more This in this plan the elevators and the elevator I should say and staircase there's only one And it stops at the level below so that it keeps the height and the massing as minimal as possible
And let's show the floor area ratio diagrams Again this just kind of show how much of or I should say how little of the space is actually living space The the large majority of this is is landscaping um and exterior
overhangs Let's show you the elevation and then context which I think is extremely important uh you know I was reading through the purpose of design review board it's been a while since I presented here and it's you know to evaluate the the context and the
appropriateness and the the urban design and I think when you look at this in context if you if you think about it this lot typically okay we're aggregating three lots you think there should be at least seven neighbors of this you know on the waterfront there's not a neighbor but if you have three
lots there should be two on each side one in the back but there are only four neighbors because all the other neighbors have already aggregated their lots that those neighbors are a condominium that has essentially six stories tall It's five stories of living
on top of parking And then on the other side of that is the standard hotel which got approved for five stories Plus their roof is an active roof with a roof deck and planters And if you see with both of them being commercial buildings they
have multiple elevator banks multiple staircases and those bulkheads So these two buildings are both higher taller and bigger than this property And then there's also 11th Century Lane which is a five-story residence which is the
other neighbor which essentially followed the same exact thing Um and I'll say the only thing that might be uncontextual is that this project is extremely sensitive to its neighbors Uh much more sensitive than all the existing
properties And I want to show what could be built here instead Uh as mentioned if these were separate parcels there's no lot coverage um maximum These can be built all the way up This is the maximum height that's allowed You can have 14
multif family units This is a multifamily zone At the parking requirements you have over 20 parking spaces loading docks dumpsters I mean this could be a massive building that's allowed by right in this multif family
district Instead we're proposing one single family home one family That's it Um there's one circle drive one threecar garage one residential elevator I think this is extremely important and we are not activating the
roof So I'll try to go faster Um just want to mention some of the design principles and priorities So ecomodern aesthetic If you notice we've integrated landscaping and natural materials and we're honoring the legacy of Miami Beach The style of this it mixes current
modern design with art deco and streamline modern Uh I'll tell you as someone in the industry I was personally offended by it being brutal mentioned at all It's very inaccurate Um and if you look at the design it's you have curved
edges and landscaping integrated in it And we have elements of art deco in it including the materials with Terzo and other things Um as I mentioned heeding the city plane department's guidance and input Um I I understand that and as we
were led the staff's recommendation was to approve this and that was changed this past week uh for neighbors saying they didn't want this built Um I ask you to look at and evaluate this honestly with what's here uh not just cuz neighbors don't want something built next to them which I understand and
respect but that's not a valid reason to object to this Um and as I mentioned this was designed very respectful for the neighbors and we treat our neighbors better than they treat us Um that was one of the principles that was guiding all of this was to be as sensitive as
possible to improve the vehicular circulation maximize the views and lights to be contextual and then belong to our home and place while creating a timeless design and the materials not nearly uh getting there So that the materials if
you see the majority of the uh property is actually glass So I have my little notes here 50% of a facade is glass What's recommended for sustainability for energy efficiency is no more than 20% of a facade should be glass But
because of all uh the feedback that we got 50% of the facade is glass 30% of the home are wood slats And I brought material here today you can see it sample Um one of the things that's really important is to have a human scale to the building So as opposed to
the neighbors that have large stucco facades this home is wood slats and glass and then we have fluted concrete at the base level which is surrounded by landscaping And the only place you have smooth concrete is I would all call the
the planter ribbons that wrap around which is that streamline uh modern aesthetic which you see throughout the beach This honors the history and tradition in Miami Beach And then the floors uh where possible obviously we have pavers for drainage but where possible including the pool deck and the
balconies are Turzo which is also very sight specific to Miami Beach and the rich history here So you can see in the renderings um so this is looking from Century Lane And I want to point out you can see in this image very clearly um
the the quarter that they're talking about in the middle does not impose any neighbor whatsoever It really doesn't Um this is a dead end Sorry that uh this is a dead end street
And at the dead end here it's glass and landscaping There's not anything that could possibly more respectful than this One point to make in that last rendering is that you can also see the roof of
Seventh Century Lane in this image and that's contextual Um the email that I just handed out to you was from that owner to me saying that in the near future he also plans to build four stories So you know what we're doing is
ahead of our neighbor but it is wholly contextual and wholly compatible and consistent with what's happening on on Century Lane Thank you And then this is showing the front entrance So again you have the Circle Drive to alleviate traffic and
congestion and you have this tucked in area to where essentially this is a a glass corridor in the home and this is a courtyard space So there's nothing imposing And again this is something that was worked on tirelessly with staff
who made this recommendation Uh and the whole reason for the massing is because staff specifically requested that there be it appear from the outside as two masses with a minimal connector Uh that's exactly what we did This is the interior space again here You can see
this from if you were inside the cabinets So you know looking at the living room dining room kitchen all together Like I said it's smaller than most apartments And looking at the children's bedrooms here can barely fit in a bed and a desk
to like I said this the whole site you know if you look at 8th century for example you have about 40 ft at this point wide and you bring in the setbacks it it's a very minimal building very minimal footprint and then this is looking at the context which I think is
the most important and I'm sorry but I'm going to have to we're doing Can I just finish right here Yeah the last points Okay last point You can you can see the context of all the other structures You know they're five stories plus and how light this
is So thank you Thank you Sure I'm now opening up to any members of the public wishing to speak Let's go forward Could Could I be added as a presenter so that I can view the online
uh to our communication staff Good morning My name is FA Horton I'm the president of the Vistas Condominium Association the association the condominium that
will be most impact by what I have heard described as imposing massive All of those descriptions are true What I would like the design board
to do is listen to our heart This is our home We don't want the quiet enjoyment of our home totally
destroyed We want to be good neighbors We do not want to stop anyone of the residents on Century Lane to not develop their lots their property They have a
right to develop their lots But when the owner of lot 8 nine and 10 purchased those lots they were fully aware of the irregular shape They
should have been if they did not know of the zoning requirements and the necessary forbearance I'm one of nine children and my home that I grew up in was never
described as massive and imposing This is a four to six or more family They are original plan with two
units That's reasonable But this massive imposing structure will be devastating to this small small
street right now This is what we're dealing with It's one lane We for the third time we are getting bids to repair our
pavers right now because of the small onelane street Everyone that goes down just about everyone that goes down that street have to turn into our driveways
and they're damaging our pavers right now individuals that limousines park on the side illegally Park on the
side near our building and across the street illegally right now if one of the residents have a party like they did one of the residents um one of the
homeowners not the vistas had a party they legally parked on the side Can you imagine 10 parking a 10 space parking
garage If you build it they will come You build 10 a unit with 10 parking spaces you're going to have 10 cars additional cars going up and down that small street
Yes Sentry Lane is a dead end street but at that dead end street is the access to our outdoor uh picnic area which we cannot get to
because cars are parked there We can't get in that gate I'm sorry Betty Are you going to wrap it up Your time is up Thank you I would like very much for you to take in consideration that we're not trying to
hinder the building of their the development of their lots We do want the plans to take in consideration the negative impact
Furthermore we are totally against the vance for aggravating the three lots They were aware of it when they purchased it The city fathers in their wisdom
um the zoning So we believe that it should not be granted Thank you Thank you Good morning and thank you everyone for your time My name is Lynn Lei I am uh
I'm the secretary and treasurer on the Vista board In addition I'm a physician at the Cleveland Clinic Uh I'm here today because this is a deeply important matter to me not because only as a homeowner but as a father a neighbor and a member in the community I'm actually
supposed to be at the National Emergency Medicine Conference right now but I'm missing it to be here because it's important to me Um okay I purchased uh the my condo at the Vista in 2012 Century Lane is a small peaceful and charming street Although it doesn't
have any sidewalk or green space it is a a quiet refuge It is where my daughter first learned how to ride her bike It is where my two and fiveyear-olds still rides still ride their scooter and bike up and down the street It is It is part of our daily lives It is part of our
memories So of course I understand that Miami and Miami Beach are growing rapidly And I'm not against development Growth is part of life but what's being proposed here is not growth Is a dramatic disruption The proposed development combining three lots to
build a single family home That's anything but typical 55 ft tall up to 13,000 square ft of space parking for 10 vehicles and minimal or no green space This is widely out of scale with the
rest of the neighborhood So for uh for perspective the structure would be 10,000 square ft larger than the surrounding single family home By comparison the standard hotel right now is 26,000 square feet and 30 ft high So
this will be half the size and way taller This project will permanently change the character of Century Lane It's not a home It is a commercial scale structure tucked into a residential street Approving it would be
dangerous Approving it would set a dangerous precedent I believe for overdevelopment and erode the very zoning protection meant to preserve communities like ours Okay Beyond the size of the home there's a real concern that this
property because of its lot size could later be turned into a multi-unit development with up to 14 units This could be devastating in terms of traffic congestion and safety If the applicant's true intent is to build a single family
home then I ask that the the board members have no object I mean that they set some restricted covenant to prevent any future conversion to multifamily use In addition the standard hotel is
redeveloping and will include six luxury private residence Are there any restriction for the standard hotel to purchase this property to become their private resident I would definitely like to have
that you know as part of the approval So Century Lane is a quiet tight-knit street where neighbors know each other and children can still play outside We're not against development We're against project that threaten the very soul of our community This is not minor variance They're a major departure from
the rules designed to protect the neighborhood we we like So on behalf of my family my neighbor and my community I respectfully ask you to help us to preserve Century Lane for peace beauty livability for our
beloved neighborhood for our children and for generations to come Thank you Thank you very much Anyone else please come forward Should be Is there anyone online Yes The the first hand raised is
a phone number It's 1 19179944648 Hello Hello Can you hear me We can hear you Uh yes Please you stay state your name and last name for the record please And I need to swear you in before you proceed sir Yes Andrew Portoi A N D R E W P O R T N O Y 920 Meridian at
apartment 8 I'm ready to be sworn in All right Thank you Uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you will be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Yes I do All right Thank you You may proceed You have three minutes
Okay Yeah Thank you First to the planning board Appreciate the public comment on the telephone line being supported here Just a comment on the Facebook link It would be nice if there was uh a teel colon plus and then the number for an easier way to click I had a difficult time joining the meeting I
wish there was just one button to click and join To the presenters amazing job to the two of you The second one I connected more with I think because I caught the beginning of the presentation However I appreciate the the love behind this project as well as the comments that were made just before me A few comments on the whole situation with
regards to the parking As a former city of Miami Beach transportation analyst I believe in the pedestrianization of the city will drive the biggest enhancement to our way of life to protect our tropical and such community Um and and while people want parking what they
actually want is ease of getting to places and ease of getting to places is a loading zone We need more loading zones and perhaps around some of these parking spaces or something in the public rightway Changing residential parking into a loading zone would help alleviate traffic congestion in these spaces In addition to that if perhaps
one of those spaces were be switched into and apologies I don't have the full configuration of Sentry Lane but just in general um converting a a parking space in that area to a loading zone or two so cars can get in You said it's a circular roundabout perhaps on a quote unquote deadend street but it's an enhancement
in connection to the community in way of life in the park Um in a different spot there could be a picnic bench So it would be a loading zone adjacent to a picnic bench to enhance the green space of what right now seems to have no sidewalk walkability Putting a putting a bench there is is
almost a movement towards more green space more well-being Um so I call I call that kind of a parking park it turn converting a parking space into a park but also enhancing the walkability with a loading zone With regards to the roof space I think activation could be good there just in terms of a green space up
there to perhaps capture carbon emissions as well as maybe provide a place for people to compost people to relax in the building Once again I we did not view the presentation but this is what I thought Uh treat neighbors as family was quoted I think we need uh treat neighbors like they treat us No I believe that we need to treat our
neighbors as family I don't care how they treat us I want to treat my neighbors as family Um and to all of you listening um thank you very much to all of you uh talking Good luck with the project whether it's here here or next time Um I'm about wise development and
and I heard something about the bridges I just hope that people can perhaps still walk the foot paths Um if the buildings are connected I I might just hope that there's a public footpath between the three uh you know conjoining uh configurations Cool You got like an interesting configuration that that's an
unbelievable opportunity Good luck with it Have fun Take care Thank you for your thoughts Andrea Next Uh next we have Scott Foxman Can you hear me Uh yes we can Mr Foxman um I do need to swear you in before you proceed though
Okay All right Uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you will be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Yes All right You may proceed You have three minutes Thank you Um Madam Chairperson I think I need five minutes I'm the one actually the most affected
by this I'm the next door neighbor to this project So I would appreciate I if you can give me five minutes If you can do it in four that would be great Let's see how far you get with four Okay We also received the the information that you sent as well Um and of course as the
direct neighbor we do take your concerns seriously So we're interested to hear what you have to say Thank you Um to begin with I'm a little from what I've heard I'm a little bothered by a couple comments already that they treat the neighbors better than neighbors take treat them I find
that offensive and not true Two is Tracy Slavvens when she said "I'm going to build a fourstory house." That's not true What I said was basically that I didn't think this project was good for them because they would lose their views if I ever built but I have no plans to build I've never I don't want to build
but I have no plans to build Three is I don't like the veiled threat by the architect that they could put a bigger you know uh apartment building there if we don't go through with this The nothing could be bigger than this by the way They're already at the maximum height They're already the maximum size
That being said let me let me explain something My wife and myself do are not objectors When they when 11th Century Lane came on and everybody fought it you know it was the new modern building on the road We did not When our neighbors came and wanted to build two buildings
next to us we actually were part of the group that approved them We were we were on their list of approvals Then they bought the third lot and they came to us and said "We're going to make green space in one lot and have two in the other." I said "Fine we approve that also." So when this project hit this was
totally different This is not what we expected what they're the applicant's asking to build a home that's massive in size has the brutalistic appearance of a hotel and is not consistent with the neighborhood It's 13,000 square ft which
makes it 10,000 square ft bigger than any other single family home on the road The standard hotel is only 26,000 square ft It's also 10 feet taller than even the highest building on on the road
which is 45 ft They're requesting three variances and two waiverss The I agree with everything the planning department said I think they did an excellent job I agree totally with all the recommendations Also there is not
everybody at the Vistas every single person in the Vistas as FA Horton can attest is not in favor of this except for one person who's friends with Tracy Slavvens Also every single family homeowner on the street is not in favor of this And so my recommendations are
first don't allow the the them to ma amass three properties together The zoning specifically rules against that The fact that they're going to try to make the argument that these are irregular lots and that there's smaller lots and all that doesn't work for me
for re there's nowhere in the statute that says oh if there's single if there's if these are irregular lots this no longer applies It doesn't say that anywhere and the planning department appreciates that Um also just like FA Horton said they knew in advance what
the deal was Okay the next I I agree with the planning department They should get rid of all the bridges between all the layer the other layers It is massive and it gives it a massive appearance I agree with the planning department Let them have a connector uh give them the
setback so they can have a one-story connector with a walking path above it I think that's a great idea the heights they want 55 feet Let's understand here the the standard on that side of the building is 25 feet They're 30 feet above the standard The other
issue is you guys enforced that 11th century only be 45 feet tall You can't do this You can't force them to be 45 feet tall but then say it's okay for the neighbor to go to 55 feet That's just that's just not right
Um the other thing I do agree that also that we have to have a restrictive covenant there They should not have the ability to turn this build this and then turn this into a an apartment building or anything like that And since Mr Sager says this is going to be the home of his
lifetime that shouldn't be a problem There has to be a restrictive covenant in there saying that Other considerations are obviously they should bring all their materials in by boat They should have a dust shield a contract to wash all the adjacent properties They should have a green space and use that green space for for
for staging for trucks and equipment On my side just as the planning department said they should put uh large traveler palms 30-oot traveler palms so that you know to as a visual barrier I want them personally move the pool equipment to the other side They're going to have an
irrigation plan understand their building is going to be their land is going to be six feet higher than mine which means I'm going to get all of the drainage from this project So they're going to have to have an irrigation plan Um that's really all my thoughts and I'm
more than glad to answer questions I feel it's the responsibility of the board to listen to the community to limit the size and appearance of the project and to make it more consistent with the neighborhood I want them to have a nice house they can have two separate buildings connected with a nice green space where they can
have a swing set for their kids or whatever they want to do that the neighborhood will be happy with it They'll still end up with a 10,000 foot house So in in conclusion I recommend the DRB deny variance three accept variance one with restrictions request
that the the the height of the home be 45 ft and require restrictive covenant to protect to prevent the home from becoming an apartment building We hope that the applicant will make the appropriate changes and that we can then support their application Thank you
Thank you very much Next we have Mr Saldo Yes Good morning Hi Hi Good morning Mr Saldo Uh do you need to swear you in before you proceed Sure Uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you will be giving in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth I do Thank you Thank you members of Design Review Board You may know me in the past as the executive director of the Miami Design Preservation League but I'm speaking today for the first time as candidate for city commission group one
And regarding uh this beautiful uh Sentry Lane it is an incredible street I remember growing up just nearby in all the small beautiful bungalows that were there and honestly thought that they were protected and they were historic
like so much of Miami Beach Over the last 10 or so years it has been so disheartening to see one by one beautiful little cottages being picked up knocked down and replaced with these mega mansions That being said I've never
seen anything as obscene as what's proposed today Maybe they have this in India where the billionaires build these apartment buildings and they call them single family homes But this is certainly not in the character of Century Lane I want to thank the members
the neighbors who have spoken up This is a point of having a design review board to protect neighborhood character I understand unfortunately Century Lane seems has been taken over mostly by investors and that they've even opposed
protecting the homes that are there But I want to urge the people that own there to also realize that you are stewards not just of your own investment and your short-term goal but for the city and the scale and the harmony that you pass
along to future generations So in short please deny this variance And in addition the planning department needs to be a little bit stronger and stand up to developers It's been very disappointing to see so many things
approved that really should not have been So I'm going to continue to stand up and I urge you to visit daniel formiami beach.org Thank you so much Thank you I see any no other hands are raised
Madam chair may I have some time for rebuttal please Sure How much time would you need I can take less than two minutes Okay Um I just want to address some of the items that have been brought up Um primarily um these are not
investors This my clients have owned these properties for years They have owned 8th Century Lane since 2015 This is intended to be their home This is going to be a home It is designed as a home It is not designed as an apartment It is it is his homestead And so he
intends to build his house here for his family of six We address all of the concerns that we heard from the neighbors who live across the street and on the street regarding parking So we address that by making sure that the footprint of almost an entire lot is dedicated to driveway and and interior
parking space so that there are not complaints from them having guests or housekeepers or workers or anybody at the house Everybody is contained within the private property I find it a bit disingenuous for people living in a six-story building that was approved
with variances for height and four setbacks to come here and say that they don't want the same development on their street that they live in This is disingenuous At the end of the day a number of these people live on the side
of the building that face Century Lane and they are upset about losing their views I have submitted a memo for the record that shows the case law proves that there is no right to a view So all of these other complaints that they are making are really a ruse to help them
protect their view corridors Um you know it's it isn't fair to my client to be penalized because people don't like change Mr Foxman you know said to you that he said he might or he's thought about building four stories on his house but I handed you an email that says I
plan to build on my property Right So again just because he's not ready doesn't mean that that my client should be held back We are open to make certain changes to the design We can add the traveler plums as requested We can reduce the driveway if that's what people really want But I know what's
going to happen later when they complain that people park on the street right Many of which are servicing the Vista's building because there isn't enough guest parking for 48 units and all the workers for renovations and everything else that goes on in there So I I implore you to be objective in your
comments back to us and to think about the rights that this family has to develop their land in an appropriate way that doesn't create impacts doesn't create 14 new residents residences on the street that doesn't create three new residences on this street This is
intended to be one house with one family and one set of traffic Despite what everyone else is saying this is a reduction The fact that it's large is okay because it's what's allowed by the code Um you know this is a multifamily district and it is characterized by
large multif family buildings throughout the island Um so with that we're happy to answer all of your questions and take the feedback and if you're ready to vote today that's great but we you know we're happy to follow staff's recommendation for continuance So thank you Thank you
very much Um I'm now going to close the public portion open it up to the board for comments Um I'd like I'd actually like Hi u Oh Madam Chair it's Commissioner Suarez I'd like to speak if possible please Sure Two minutes Thank
you I I really wasn't going to speak until I heard the last caller uh or the last person speak Um you know I I I think it's disingenuous to tell the neighborhood that you know just because you're not allowed to build because we don't like
the views That's how they bought the properties They bought the properties thinking that this is what's going to be the same view for the next for the for for the foreseeable future
And you know we have laws in place that prevent these sorts of developments from aggregating into three lots That rule exists Why does it exist is ex is to prevent this exact type of
development And so you know I I think for all the talk that we say uh we're going to listen to the residents of the neighborhood and particularly at the DRB Um here is a clear-cut case where the residents have
come out They have very much disagreed with this project and the the the applicant is asking for a waiver to uh for our our zoning laws So I I think it's prudent upon you to deny
this project Um I I certainly don't want to see um these types of projects pop up over the city where we have these mini mansions uh next to the the most charming houses So thank you and have a
great day Thank you very much Any other members of public wish to speak Okay Uh I'm now going to close the public portion open it up to the board for discussion Um I'd like to again and as as um the applicants mentioned in their discussion that really I think
there's many different things to address and questions but I'd like to maybe focus our discussion initially on the question of variance three which is aggregating the lots I think that that really the whole project really hinges on excuse me um what I'm saying is our
approval of that aggregation Um so I I guess I have a my question is more for Raelio to better understand and I don't know if there I'm curious to know one of my questions was perhaps
why this what is the reasoning behind not allow allowing two lots to be aggregated but not three So this is a a citywide standard for the for the RM1 district And the intent was
um the RM1 district is a low-intensity multif family residential district Um and the intent is for there to be smaller apartment buildings and not the larger apartment buildings that you see in the ARM two and ARM three districts Um so that was really the goal that the ARM1 district you have it on Bell Ale
you have it in Flamingo Park you have it in North Beach few areas in Mid Beach and you and the the context is smaller low-scale apartment buildings Um so that's that's the intent of that that regulation so that you don't end up with a block long uh apartment building that
that just doesn't fit in with the built context So that's the reason for it um in this area as as as we mentioned in our staff report the lots are are not uh to the standard that is required by the code They are legally non-conforming lots They were platted that way So we
consider them a legal buildable lot Um but they can demonstrate a potential practical difficulty given that they are smaller um smaller lots um that don't meet the uh the minimum um minimum requirement for a for a standard lot today And and they were initially
plotted obviously as single family homes as opposed to multif family homes Correct Correct Okay And and I and I know that in the materials you provided there was a little bit of a history or somebody had spoken about that there was the city was going to change this or um
is there had been ever I guess at what point do you know did the zoning change to go from single family homes to multifamily As far as I know it's it's been RM1 for a very long time Actually I think it may have been higher It may have been Yeah Um it was RM 100 before
Um we we pulled the zoning maps to the beginning of the city Um originally Bell Isle was a mansion island There were you know a dozen mansions on the island Um but starting in the 50s the mansion
started to disappear and and reszoning allowed for RM 100 which is 100 unit per acre development And then in 1989 when the city's modern code was adopted the zoning was changed to RM1 which is the 60 units per acre And that's always been
in place since 1989 on the north side of the island Okay I have a question for you too Raelio Um just if this was a multifamily project would they still be seeking the same variance to aggregate the three
lots Yes If if they wanted to Yeah Okay And if it if it was a multifamily project would they be required to do any sort of like public improvements Because what I'm hearing a lot is this this road is being the the big issue Mhm Um so would they be required to maybe like
widen improve the road make that more pedestrian friendly or um so if they had if they were proposing more than fi five or more units they would have to do a traffic study Um and potentially as part of that traffic study there would be uh improvements that would come out of that
I can't tell you specifically what they would have to do Um but as part of the traffic study I presume there would be a a requirement for them to have internalized loading or or maybe widen their driveway access something something But I I can't tell tell you for certain what would come out of that
Okay Thank you I would I don't know if if you ever been to the street but this is you know there's no sidewalk there's no swale It's so it's tiny It's a tiny lane Um so Roelio if it were a multifamily it
would require um traffic study um um if it was five units or more Correct um which normally would be five vehicles or more and this is a potential of 10 vehicles Um so does it make sense and
I'm not asking for a answer now Does it make sense to then say this should require a traffic study Um I have several questions that obviously for the next meeting when this item is continued we can you can send us the information
the height of the current and the future approved standard What is that Because I keep on hearing different heights for the current standard of uh 30 ft and 50 ft Um and then what is the current
height of the Vistas condo um that was before us today Um where is the entrance to the Vistas condo the number of units they have and the number of parking spaces for those units
including guest parking Um as far as the vistas and the standard current and the standard proposed what is the lot sizes and the unit sizes that were approved and did
they get approved with any variances or waiverss My next question is are there other city locations that have aggregated more than two lots that are in the RM1 districts I know there's more than two lots in uh
single family home Um but I don't know about the RM1 districts Um if lots 8 9 and 10 were developed separately as a home And I'll email you these questions so you don't
get If lots eight nine and 10 were developed as homes and if they were developed as condos what would the lot coverage unit size and height be without any variances or
um waiverss Also I this is our landscape architect here on the board but um there was a mention of using a traveler palm Uh my experience has been that traveler
palms are a haven for rats So you may want to take that into consideration because you're very close to the edge of the water Um there was a mention made um that this property lot eight is
homesteaded It is not According to the property appraisals office um it is owned by the applicant and the other two lot 9 and 10 are LLC's Um I also found the difference
between the lot sizes 8 9 and 10 um to be different than the total application lot size a difference of only about 100 uh square feet So you may want to look at that Thank you
Thank you Um did you want really did you want him to answer that now If you can on any other questions fine Otherwise we can we're looking up the the standard did come recently I believe they received a lot aggregation variance um because of
the they were adding a driveway um to the front of the property and I believe they needed to add um an additional one or two lots because of that So they did receive um a lot aggregation variance for the height The they were proposing
um a new building I believe it's on the eastern side of the lot The western side of the lot is remaining the same I don't think they were they were maybe updating the building a little bit but they weren't uh proposing new construction I think the new construction has an eastern portion of the lot And we're going to look up the height that was that was proposed for that If I may
Madam Chair I have a slide that shows the elevation for the new standard building We can switch to this Um so this is the Vista's footprint on the plat that apply to it Um and as you can see it's on seven formerly six formerly
single family home lots and a multif family lot which is the triangular one on the south side The standard elevation shows that the overall height of the building is 70 feet It's here So to the top of roof is
70 feet To the top of level five is I think that's I think I'm reading this right 59 feet is the roof line So that's the height Level five is at 46 feet But overall with the active roof and all of the equipment notwithstanding the elevator bulkheads the top of roof is
shown as 70 ft And that's the new wing not the current one that's ab budding century current one um I believe is in this lower um elevation and it shows that the exterior third finish floor is 33
feet So that's that's I believe tracking the the the the westernmost building I don't it's hard to tell on this because there's a diagonal line but the the on the on the right hand side um it shows
exterior finished floor 33 feet NGVD 24T So that's the that's the the budding building to my client's property And and um to address um the comment about the homestead you're correct This was homesteaded previously Um they've since
moved out because the family doesn't fit in there anymore And so yes but it is owned individually and then the LLC's are 100% owned by Michael Sager as well So the Yeah Yeah the height proposed for the standard was 55 ft Um and that's for
the the new building on the eastern portion of the lot Is that fairy lane Closer to fairy lane Fair Not on fair Yeah that's what we said It was the other side Closer Not on Fairy Lane but closer It's not next to Sentry Lane Um
they received an a lot aggregation variance to obtain a lot on Ferry Lane for their driveway Right And that was just one but the initial property is much larger Yes Then it's the the whole length Yeah Um are there any other um you had some
question there questions on what they could do if they were separate lots that I'm going to have to do some math on that so I can I can have that for you for the next um Also can I interrupt But would you say though that it could be like what was already built on century lane number 11 the very tall skinny
potentially Yeah Yeah I mean that seems to be um I don't want to inter I have more thoughts about that but I don't want to interrupt That's I think that's what it would would potentially look like Yeah Have Have you seen that Yes What they
just built Yes I've been to the area Um let me ask you can you put up the um site plan that shows the vistas and the proposed um either one of them Where is the vista's entrance since all of you are
here Okay You know what There's a um Give me one second There I don't I'm looking I'm looking at the presentation Maybe it's page 36 36 Okay It it shows it's a Yeah there's
another model there that um mine mine aren't numbered So Oh Oh wait Wait one go back That Okay that isn't that the entrance and the corner Yes So the Vistas has a an entrance um at the lower left hand side of the screen where
you see that um circular area That's it's our rendering shows it as grass but that is their front entrance And then there's a secondary entrance on the north side of the building towards the waterway for the garage And I think there's garage and dumpsters and other
things there It's back of house Thank you Oh wait I'm I'm sorry In order to um see hear you we need to come up to a microphone Um however the public portion is closed for now I don't know if you're going to be adding additional What I
would recommend is let us have our discussion and then yeah um because it's just beginning um any other um height of the well uh the variance was provided I think it it has some of those numbers for the
vistas 58 ft 58 ft I'm not sure if that's measured from grade I believe at that time it would have been measured from grade 58 I'm sorry What is 58 ft The height of the vistas Okay According to this variance um that was passed out Um we'll
we'll look at the plans and get you u and ensure that that's correct but that that generally seems to be in the range of what's correct Are there specific reasons like did did you want to express were you going somewhere with the questions now I think that it's
important to know what surrounds this develop this home that they are proposing to build to know what's around it Is it going to be taller Is it going to be lower Um where are the entrances to the vistas to the home How does that affect Sentry Lane It's just for my
information to be able to come up with a conclusion um together with the input from the community and the architects Thank you Akil So I was just curious Do you think the intent of the new design could be
accomplished with two separate buildings Yeah if I may answer that because there's something I wanted to mention uh specifically regarding the the new recommendations that you know came out two days ago after working on this for two years Um and the answer is absolutely no If if you look at you know
the first comment that suggests eliminating the what they're calling the enclosed conductor but the corridor u which could be completely solid and built out but it's not It's minimized in glass and has uh plants What would be required are two separate stairwells If
you're going to bring something to you need two separate stairwells by fire code You also practically speaking will have two separate elevators you know whether you have strollers parents uh elderly parents living you know visiting
So you'll have twice the massing So you'll have the elevator bulkheads the stair bulkheads Additionally with with the fire code if you have two separate fire areas which are defined as the exterior wall enclosure So if you break this out uh you're required to have a
fire hose connection on the roof So now the staircase needs to extend above the roof line we have that uh staircase bulkhead which right now we have minimized by having this as one single family home So very sincerely this was worked on tirelessly to minimize the
impact as much as possible and we you know created this after we got the uh the the new comment But these considerations have very sincerely already been considered uh which is why I was very strongly suggesting this be approved today because these
recommendations would actually result in a larger massing and a larger impact and more imposing structure than what is proposed Have you considered adding additional planters on the roof like you see in commercial buildings such as palms or
anything like that to lessen the Well yes So what we did if you seen the the renderings is there almost the entire perimeter is covered with overhanging plants and the in the landscape architect is here The reason we did that is to soften you know the edge as much
as possible So you really you see greenery and glass and and that's it Um when looking through here which it's really impossible to do anything more minimal than that The reason we didn't do additional trees or things like that is that would add to the verticality of
it So this is really really suppressed and to answer your question as far as the the height and we have the context elevations in here and in the presentation Uh when you actually look at the actual NGVD you know the flood elevation height and comparing this in context this house is is shorter It's
smaller You don't have the elevator bulkheads the staircase bulkheads on the roof This is smaller in context Yes I have a comment Um variance number three it says uh 7.2.4.3 no more than two continuous lots
may be aggregated for development purposes with the exception of projects classified as affordable and or workforce housing I'm going to ask a question I know the answer Affordable housing workforce
housing anything in there in the project it it would need to be a multif family building in order for it to be workforce or affordable housing Thank you Um I'd like I think that was one of the points that I was going to make too
Gabriel that you know I keep again I keep going back to this variance number three which seems to be you know the lynch pin of what's being proposed and you know I mean the code is very clear It says no more than two lots can be
aggregated unless the workforce housing and that's not the case here So I got to say I'm inclined not to approve variance number three I mean it seems like there's an important intent as to why this variance is the way it is There
doesn't seem to be a hardship in that Yes you know the clients were aware of the size location everything of the lot when they purchased it I don't see I have I generally speaking have a problem with these are the laws these are the
regulations Everybody in the community needs to follow these regulations These regulations are here for a reason They're probably very well thought out by city planners city officials staff everybody I I I don't see a reason beyond this is what we would like to do
to not follow the regulations I don't know if that's where if you were in in agreement with that You know I'm bringing up the point Most definitely You know I I don't know what it I think we create a slippery slope when we do when we approve this because we approve it once then we're creating a precedent
to continue doing it And that's a problem that we're continuously having with overdevelopment that we're making exceptions every time And I think also in this you know again context this is such a small street and
um there's not a lot of wiggle room here And if if I I think that there was an oversight and we've talked about this in the last few years I wish Scott was here because we've seen I think maybe eight different homes proposed for these lots where you're allowed to build up to five
stories And so people do and what ends up happening we've gone back and forth many times and you end up with these very awkwardlooking buildings because the lot sizes are very small And instead of saying "Oh I could build this high but I want to build something that's
more appropriate for the context." The decision is always "Let's maximize it out." And I I personally have never although some projects have been approved I've never really seen a proposal a design that isn't awkward and
doesn't really stretch the context And I think part of the fault is that maybe and I know this has been discussed before with the commission that the zoning of these lots is not appropriate But whatever it is it now is it comes to us to be able to say to listen to you
know applicants property owners members of the community and say okay is this appropriate Is this a good use of these properties of this zoning Does it meet the intent of the code And again I keep going back in this instance I wouldn't mind it if you were I would be
supportive if you wanted to aggregate lots 9 and 10 That makes sense to me I would be supportive if you wanted to aggregate lots seven and eight That make that makes sense to me I went to Century Lane yesterday and I stood there for a while and sort of looked and absorbed
And part of the problem and you've pointed it out numerous times in your presentation part of the problem is that lot number eight is is you know a little bit odd shaped and there is a street that essentially blocks or cuts between
property you know number century lane 8 and nine And that's really what makes this even more awkward and more um difficult to aggregate So I and I want I want to be helpful I want to be constructive I really have I really like
I'm I'm impressed staff has come up with a um a compromise here I think that that you know of of yes we like this but you know without having the four levels of walkway but I I keep going back to I don't think that these lots should be
aggregated And I if that's where we're going to be with our vote I mean I I don't know if if that's that's the heart of the matter I'm happy to help and work with you and make suggestions and do other things architecturally
Um but I I Yeah And if I may Madam Chair respectfully the the purpose of the code to limit the lot aggregation was to make sure that you don't have completely oversized lots right The minimum lot size in RM1 is 5600 square ft So if you
did a three lot aggregation you'd be at 16,800 square feet The aggregation of these three lots at 10,200 and change is still less than what two minimumsized lots in RM1 that meet the
code would be which is 11,200 So in pursuing the variance we looked at it and and you know staff and had conversations with us about it that you're that the lot aggregation request is not unreasonable because it doesn't
even meet the threshold for what two minimum combined lots would be And yet you could have a you could have a single family home if you combined lots you know nine and 10 I mean that homes like that exist throughout the city Um we
already approved an entire single family home for lot 3 It's not like these lots are impossible to build homes on You can have these structures but what you're proposing what you're asking us to do is against the code I mean that that's sort
of why you're here and it's up to us to weigh it out I mean in the past though it seems like this is something that has either gone to planning or gone to board of adjustment How come it's now here at the DRB or um the DRB that variances are the DRB has
the ability ability to approve variances Um prior to 2016 it would have gone to the board of adjustment but in 2016 the the ability to consider variances was granted to the DRB Okay Other comments from the board Yes Uh if you take lots uh nine and 10 and the lot sizes of
those two combined is about 5700 So if you just build on lots nine and 10 and you have 5,700 lot size on those two lots you're restricted by a much smaller uh unit size and lot coverage That makes
it quite difficult to build a little house on there especially with the configuration of the lots Probably explanation as to why they're aggregating now lot eight Uh I think we're dealing as a city as a
neighborhood and as a board with a situation that occurred years ago as you stated where this was first an island of mansions In the 50s it changed to RM 100 and now in the 80s it changed to RM1 And
so we're dealing with a combination of single family homes very few single family homes and the majority being condominiums um that exceed the size the bulk and the
feeling of a single family area And so I think that's what we're faced with now Um just my thoughts that's why um I asked you some of the questions because I said well if they keep it as this then
what happens if they you know so um I think we need to take that into consideration this is not a single family district this is an RM1 district and at the same time we have to be
respectful of the single family home that's left Foxman Um and we have to be respectful of the condominium um and the standard that are adjacent to the property How we do that we'll see at
the next meeting Other thoughts from I I I have difficulties really with with the aggregation of the lot So I'm going to move that we deny the the variance Okay
Um how do what what happens with that I mean what would be the next step Let's say you know we go through we do because it because there's only five of us the variance needs a unanimous approval which it doesn't seem like we're moving that direction Um where does that leave
the applicant the process Can I can I just add this I I think we need to take this as an entire package and not address single requests for variances or waiverss that are before us Yeah But if you don't have the approval
of the aggregation the whole design has to change and we will know exactly how much it has to change if we're continuing the project Um I I still need more information based on my questions
before um to be able you know have a to be able to decide whether we aggregate or not Um so I that's my thought on it I I think we we can't take a peace meal in separate meetings I think we if we're
going to continue it then let's continue it and let's get more information I I think they get the draft the draft of the drift of where we're going You know there's uh a good feeling of not aggregating three lots and then
there's reasons for aggregating three lots So let's see what they come back with and let's see what we have at the next meeting That's my thought My answers on the questions that were raised very briefly you Well do you
think it would be helpful or I feel like we're almost sort of going in a different direction Maybe it's something for next time Um I mean do you want to I want I I want some feedback from you if that's why I want to ask the question Okay Um so
regarding the you know aggregating the the three undersized parcels that do not meet the definition of lot uh for this the reason for the massing right now is because that's what planning directed us to do to respect the historical setbacks
as though there was a front setback at the dead end street That's the reason it's set in so much uh at that area and you have it narrow You could have actually I would be willing to say that the reason the massing is the way it's done is because you wanted to have buildings on all three properties You could have also made the decision to
just build a house on lots 9 and 10 and then leave lot eight as open space a yard a pool all of that So I realize that I see where you're going No I have a question My my question is that
the the reason this is is set back very sincerely is because that was the director plan to respect the historical setbacks In the past variances were granted so it wouldn't look irregular and so there would be you know just one facade With the comments that were given
in in this report the the only way to address it would be to ask for additional variances or to not respect the historical setbacks uh to build in that area where right now it's set in so much to bring that closer out uh to to
the street uh which I understood wasn't desired So my question is for your direction is going to be revisit or looked at you know are you open to that means instead of having it set in to where you have the courtyard in the home that it's brought out to look like a
more regular shape but it will be closer to the street and more imposing Can do you have an an like a rendering or an image that you could show that illustrates your question where exactly you're talking about in the presentation Yeah see I have the
lots up right now and I I can show a rendering too But if you look on the left is eight and the right is 9 and 10 So if you look right now the existing home is at the dead end street the existing home is right next to the street What we did in the new design
it's set back um it's almost 20 feet about 15 feet in from the street set back from the street which you know was requested to respect the historical setbacks And then the the masses are set back from that middle line to each side
to respect those historical setbacks as if those were side setbacks uh when really we following the setbacks for one lot It could be just one structure Like I said that' be more closer to the street where the existing home is right
now Does that make sense Can you just It's It's hard Sorry It's It's hard to see on the Yeah just point out specifically where Okay Yeah I wasn't sure that worked So this is from there to the ocean to the bay is Li
right So this area right here to the left and I'll I'll just go to the overhead as you can see this is set back significantly from the street and this is divided to appear like two separate structures as though cuz if this was a
separate lot you had a side set back here and a side set back there and we were asked to respect those historical setbacks If this was you know brought straight across and not set back like this then it wouldn't look as unique Uh
you know it would be look like a normal structure but it would be closer to the street and the neighbors And you're asking us if it would be okay to go back to essentially a wider structure right because that is the
alternative that I see Yeah No And I mean I personally I think that you know you on your end you know you've taken some very unique circumstances and these are you know this is different lot sizes and and these are different requirements
You know you have a large family um that especially you know number eight is again it's an irregularly shaped lot We we've met these challenges before you know with other designs that have been proposed Um there's also the value of the property You know there's there's a
lot of things And again you're also uniquely I don't I don't know if there's many other streets in Miami Beach that are this narrow that that don't have any swale any breathing room at all Um so you're definitely faced with a unique
set of circumstances which is why you know there's always so much discussion about these properties whenever things are being proposed Um I personally to answer your question you know I mean I do think breathing room is nice and I understand that by aggregating the properties you are
getting a bit more breathing room It's unfortunate that the three properties are not all regular You know I think I think that that's for me also part of the issue with the aggregation that if if it was if they were three right next to each other this would flow better and
maybe and and certainly it would affect the design Um but it's not And so you know that creates the challenge I don't for me personally I don't know how I would answer the question of can you now if you're doing it separately can you make it wider
because I need to be presented with an idea to see it Um I don't know if anybody else has another opinion Um oh wait oh got to turn on your microphone Another opinion that's one second
Gabriel Okay Okay About the the v the variance and aggregating Yeah So we have we have a motion and a second to deny variance number three Yes Okay Um can I just ask you one question In RM1 what is
the percentage of lot coverage and unit size that you can have in the lot So RM1 doesn't have unit size It has F The F is 1.25 For lots that are less than 60 ft in width there is a lot coverage limitation of
45% If it was if it's over that width then the lot coverage is is unlimited So if you have a lot that's 4600 let's say square feet you're limited to 45% of that for lot coverage
Yes that's lot eight In lot nine you have 2700 square f feet roughly So you're limited to 45% of that lot coverage but you can go up five stories You can go up five stories And so it'd be like a an elevator shaft basically
And in lot 10 you have 3,000 square feet lot So 45 square feet of lot coverage or 45% of lot coverage would make that a lot coverage of 1500 I think if you combine those two you would exceed the
65 ft So you wouldn't have that same lot coverage if you combine nine and 10 But if you go Yeah it depends what they combine eight and nine or nine and nine and 10 Um they can combine nine and 10 and
leave eight as green space Said it backwards I'm going to but that would limit them to then um lots nine and 10 together are about 20 I'm sorry 5,700 square ft And
you're saying 60% would be the lot coverage Let me let me just verify that I'm giving you the correct number Okay Lots equal to or sorry I said it back Lots equal to or greater than 65 ft in width have a 45% lots lot limitation
Lots less than 65 ft in width do not have the lot aggregation limitation Okay So none of these or some of these have the lot aggregation Correct Uh oh So um so let's see Um if you if you aggregated
lots um eight and nine you would have a lot with over 65 ft and you would not and you would be subject to the lot 45% 45% And if you aggregated nine and 10
let's see what the lot width I don't have the lot widths I just have the square footage I can I help or Yeah Do you have the lot Yes I have I say I have it on here So eight alone is definitely less than 65
ft Each lot is less than 65 ft wide So if you aggregated 9 and 10 together there is the 45% limit in the code Um regardless of whether I'll say 8 doesn't have the coverage lot coverage because
it's less than 65 ft in width And if you looked at uh eight and nine together for example um neither if you look at those as a parcel the width on both of those is less than 65% So there's no lot coverage limit if you combine those
either and that would be a lot of approximately um that would be so 3,000 that' be about 7,000 square feet about 75 7600 square feet with no restriction on lot coverage Correct It's just over
7,000 70 I have it right here Almost 7,300 If they take eight and nine which lot eight is the one closest to the ocean to the bay they could basically build all the way to almost the boundary lines with the exceptions of the required setbacks
Roelia Yes And five feet up But then then when you aggregated it will be bigger than 65 ft Well because by the width So the width it doesn't because of that one sort of smaller pinch point in the in the middle It's the minimum width
Is that am I understanding Yeah Yeah The the only reason for very easy The only reason for a lot coverage limit is if nine and 10 are aggregated Yeah See and and if we're having difficulty here now figuring out the lot widths and what zoning applies
to it when it pertains to lot coverage and unit size let's get that information and then let's make an informed decision based on the information at the next meeting That's why I'm asking for some of this because when you say well let's
not aggregate I I agree I don't like more than two lots There's a reason for not having more than two lots But these lots are so small so irregular that what happens when you do not aggregate the three lots What happens if they build on
only two lots Are they going to come back to us with a much more huge structure that is even more out of place because now their lot coverage doesn't pertain the percentage of lot coverage doesn't pertain to the two lots that
they're aggregating And if I can just ask one other question because this is helpful as feedback Um if we' mentioned kind of the the pinch points at the dead end street um other than building out closer to the street I don't know the allowance or the process
The only way I see to make this more regular would be to seed some of that dead end street to the property so that they can have more of a front yard and green space buffer So I don't know the process or if that's allowed for that but that's digging I think you're
digging your hole Yeah I can't imagine the I think you should stop there and take your loss That's a public right away and it takes um a little bit more than this board to approve what you just mentioned as an idea And it also
restricts their entrance to the garage even further Madame Chair there's a I'm going to call the question Okay Okay So we have a a a motion by Mr Pas
second by Mr Lester uh to deny variance number three Um should we do a roll call or would you or a voice vote Do you have a preference Uh no no preference Okay Well let's do a let's do a roll call Miss Bhutakavoli
No Mr Mr Dender is absent Miss Giller Nelson Um yes So yes is not approving the variance Correct Yes Is to deny variance number three Yes To Oh yes Uh Mr Lester Yes M Leuen Yes Mr Pies Yes So
that's um 4 to one in a denial of a variance A majority a majority of the quorum um rule So the variance is denied Variance number three is denied
Yes So where does that leave I I also I do despite that vote I do want to be constructive to the applicant and the property owner So I don't know if if h how can we do that And and what about the rest Does this denial of the
variance I guess they would need to revise the project and remove one of the lots the choice would be theirs which lot to remove and uh work with the rest of the work to redesign with those two lots Correct Um if I may Madam Chair I think we'd also have to look at what other
requests would need to be made to accommodate a redesign So we may need to readvertise Um so I would ask for a continuence on the other items to give us time and I I think to no date certain at this point maybe I because I don't
think we'll be ready by July if I'm being honest Um that's because this is a big rework So um we could either maybe do it to the September agenda or or give us uh the opportunity to readvertise when we're ready under the same process number We can so you can defer the
application um and then we'll readvertise when we're ready to move forward Okay Roelio I have a question Is it possible for them and they can aggregate just two lots and the third lot would not be under the same homestead exemption And this my thinking
but it could be just a lot that has a pool and um green space let's say I I don't think so because uh those are accessory uses to a primary use and the primary use has to be residential So you just can't have a a residential lot with
a and the pool makes it an accessory use but if you just leave it as green space would that also be considered accessory use I think it has to have a a guest house or something on it right Some structure that some structure you could build a small a small residential unit
on it ADU could be that too or um an ADU would not meet the minimum unit size requirements most likely So but you could have a small one unit home on it on the property That would be could a cabana A cabana Yeah a cabana is not a
cabana wouldn't be a unit You would need to have a unit a legal unit on the site I know there is there was a property on North Bay Road that we had approved and they just built a tennis court on it They tore down the house Mhm I don't know if that's I mean maybe there was some sort of So for single family
districts you can aggregate three lots but the third lot has to be used for open space and cannot count towards your maximum unit size requirements You can also move the home so that it's in the middle of the three lots but you have to have the equivalent amount of space as
as the smallest lot for open space Um I mean that might model It seems like that's more of a model for what because the RM the RM1 laws are thinking more of multif family homes but what the applicant is proposing is a single
family home and that I mean that might be a way to understand the property better and be able to because I think that what we all seem to be saying and I think even with other members of the community is that
and the challenge is taking is that you're combining different requirements to to make a single family home whereas the zoning and the requirements are really dealing with multif family homes And so maybe if you look at if you look at the single family home zoning as a
model that might be a way to figure out what would seem acceptable to members of the community Does that make sense That's a question Yeah Can the third lot be reconfigured or used for like a gym or sauna and a pool and then one single
family one single unit in it as well If if they had one unit then you could have the gym and and as part of that unit as an accessory to that unit You could have a guest house pool and a need Yeah you would need you would need a full unit on
there though for it to be accessory to that res full unit with kitchen bathroom We approved an entire house on that property already So there is space It's just a matter of design choices Um is there any other and that's something
that I would be open to approving but not combining all three By saying that would you if if they came back and said okay we're going to do the main house and again I don't want to overstep here We're going to do the main house on aggregate on lots um 9 and 10
and then on lot eight we're just going to have a pool house and a pool Would you and you came and said can we aggregate the property for that use Is that something that would be approved I would approve that Okay Something that you would be supportive of Yeah Yeah You think that's a better use of the massing
And and something else I just want to say to be more constructive for the the next time you guys come through So I mean I think what I've been hearing a lot from the public is this Century Lane's very important and and the the experience the pedestrian experience specifically here So to your question
earlier about you know the setbacks and you being you know more leaning towards the historical setbacks would we be opposed to bringing the setbacks closer to the street I mean I'm open to seeing that I think that that that sometimes helps the pedestrian
experience Um so I guess Where I'm going with this is when you do present next time I think if we could get some some viewpoints from how that's going to look um I think that would be a a big help here especially assuming you're combining nine and 10 and realizing that
you may need to get more square footage and bring the buildings closer to the street Um sorry last question Are they allowed to come back with the the variance again if they readjusted the design I I think so you can come if if you came back with a
different any a different design you could ask for different variances Correct the three lot Um the only way to do that would be on a motion for reconsideration that you would have to do like now um and leave it open for us
um without the denial I think because otherwise you have another item after us on the agenda right So the action has to be taken before the next item's called if I recall correctly We I I thought that a motion to reconsider can happen at a following meeting but also put this
meeting Can't we just continue it to make that motion Can't we do a motion to continue the rest of the project for the meeting in September We don't meet in August I would recommend that Right So to the September meeting or before if
they're ready Well though I guess I mean I to your point that you're making before that we should consider everything before picking it apart I guess what what I'm realizing is that by saying oh if it was designed differently maybe we'd be more open to the aggregation It seems like
now we're moving to that So I don't know where that leaves us If the third lot far left is an eight I think Yes That one was stepped down significantly to a one story or a pool house type structure I don't that would be a lot more I think
amendable for most people but with the vote that was taken by this board they cannot come back I know that's what I with an aggregation of three lots I was recommending to not separate this until
just give them they get the feedback I think they are loud and clear let's leave it open and vote on it at except the only thing is against that is we're making the aggregation conditional on the design but I'm
thinking long term you know what this is this property this is this owner but I I think that it's not I don't see it as conditional if they come back still with an aggregation of three lots and the design is not something that
is acceptable um that's favorable we can still deny the aggregation of the three lots and deny right Well I just wonder if we're setting a a precedent for now once we
aggregate the properties the properties are aggregated and anything can be built there from that point It depends what they come back with If they come back with open space with and a and a restriction that it not be developed in
the future then that's okay But if they come back with a separate structure you know depending on the size of it on the third lot then that may not be acceptable So I think we have to see I personally think there's ways to get
away with doing having it still be two separate properties I mean you can always just put up a fence between them You know you can change it around You don't I I I don't feel comfortable aggregating these three properties regardless of the design if you want to get the design approved in general you
know you want to do but but I at least that I I think that that's I don't I don't think that these properties should be aggregated So then Roelio if if that is the case then the only thing they can do is come back with an aggregation of just the two lots whichever two lots
they pick and the third lot because they own it they would have to build a home on it that could be five stories depending on you know the lot coverage and unit size requirements for that zoning correct for RM1 Mhm
Okay But they cannot come back with an accessory use to those two lots that they're going to build on It cannot be a pool It cannot be a tennis court It cannot be a pool house It would
have to be a fullervice a standalone development Development Okay any other um direction or recommendations or anything that you would like to see that moving forward for the future
development anything else I I think also too you know the the feedback that you know we've been getting in the impression they get clearly there one of the things that I do like about the design is this sort of step effect motion that there is you know there was a concern um to create a canyon effect
and again like there's you know very there's a lot of challenges with this property Um but but I I think that that also seems to be of deepest concern to community members and and this board that you know it is this is still a house and it has to sort of read as a
house and the height also um is is a major part of that and to have that sort of sensitivity I understand that with I think that what made the the nicer parts of the design include the stepping back and I realize that when the property is a little bit smaller that's not you know
you're losing space in other areas Again I want to be sensitive to that but in terms of what was successful with this design and with this proposal you know the sort of aireriness and the lightness and the stepping back part I think is also a good compromise Um and I
personally I I liked and again the the the driveway configuration I did think that that was a good solution Um especially too because we've seen with these understory homes I mean you know the understory is for cars to be used It's not meant as a living space And
there are going to be deliveries and there is going to be a lot and that that is a very small lane And so um I I like that and I I'd like to see that again I don't know whatever But but you know I thought that was a good direction to go in Okay Me personally I I just um don't
think that a fivestory structure reads to me as a single family home It just doesn't I don't We don't see it anywhere else on the beach A single family home is usually two stories and maybe with an understory So a five-story home is never
going to look like a home A single family home Um so but this zoning does allow that and so you can't not allow it cannot restrict that but that I mean that was
the this is within the lynch pin of all the discussions and it and it's in context with the rest of the buildings surrounding you know the vistas is even higher the standard is higher the proposed standard is higher and that's
the conflict that we are in we are in an RM1 that has turned into not you know from a mansion to a condominium buildings Um and still some single family homes were left that are
now being developed to be allowed to be the height of a condominium But if they were to build a house with an understory that would be taller than the standard building that's adjacent to it Because a home with an I mean we're at the point with the understories where
the houses are 45 feet and the standard what you said it was about 35 30 something So you could build a height you know a tall the single family homes today are very tall Yes And you could it wouldn't be out of proportion You could go up to a height I don't know Roelio
you can speak as to this better than me Do you have single family homes with an understory using the maximum height that they're allowed without variances or waiverss Do you have single family homes that go up
um what is it uh for uh 55 ft or 30 ft Not in the single family districts but I believe we do have on rare occasions a single family home built in a multif family district that that might be larger you know Yes But in a single
family regular single family home doesn't come up to the maximum height allowed here which is 55 Correct No I guess what I'm what I was saying is that we have homes that are taller than the standard the building the standard on the north street including I believe and
I have to double check the one that we're about to see here next The old standard is 33 feet high Yeah Like this imaging Yeah Yeah the the home that we're going to see next is 45 feet from grade to to ceiling So that would be so you could
put a single family home with an understory on that property and and the heightwise it would I think it would work within the context of the street because the single family homes have gotten so tall Sure depending on the base flood elevation in that area and
then the freeboard But is it going to be then dwarfed by the properties around it I don't No because the standard isn't the standard is going to be shorter The standard is 33 feet right now 35 and 33
is what they mentioned and Vistas is 58 ft Right But if they were to build I mean we're about to hear a a a proposal for a single family home that's 45 ft It's a sing it's a home with an understory So to your point everything
around it is allowed to be that Uh and the maximum would be that in a single family but this is not what we have here We have a big a bigger structure vistas which is 55 I think I mentioned 55 and
then you have the new standard that's going to be 70 approximately and the current standard that's uh 33 The section of the standard that's going to be that far is on the other side It's still part of the neighborhood It's still part of that same side of of
uh of um Belle View of Bell Island Yeah Okay I don't know if we've been helpful at all You have Thank you very much I know it's been a long morning and I you know I I appreciate your patience with us and all of your feedback Um so I
think what's left is a motion motion to defer the item uh and for it to be renoticed um at a later date Does anybody want to make a motion I'll make that motion to defer Second Second Who gets the second Apolog I heard I
heard three Who wants it Uh okay Miss Bagawi Sure Um uh all those in favor I Any oppose Motion passes Okay Um I'd like to call a fivem minute recess between projects
real quickly please Please stand by We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1 Welcome back to the April design review board meeting We are hearing our next and last application
DRB24 1042 1520 Stillwater Drive Applicant were that's not on our agenda Are you here for a special master Oh that's on the first floor This is the design review board Make sure you let them know in case just
if if your case came up they may say you didn't show and just say we were up on the third floor where you we will vouch for you Vouch for you We'll vouch for Okay then I So that 24 1042 is there's there's someone with their hand raised online
Antonio Rodriguez I have a feeling that's if I'm not mistaken that's the name of the architect Do you mind if I ask Antonio Rodriguez Can you hear me Yes Are you here for 1520 Stillwater
Drive I am Okay You're the architect correct Yes sir Okay I wanted to ask uh am I going to be sharing my screen and the drawings or is that something you bring up bring up there If you emailed it to staff we
typically bring it up here Um Okay Yeah Uh Antonio before you proceed I do need to swear you in if you will be since you'll be presenting virtually Yes All right Uh do you swear uh the testimony you'll be giving today is
truth uh and nothing but the truth I do All right Thank you You may proceed All right But before that this application has been filed requesting design review design review approval for the new construction of twotory residence with an understory including
one or more waiverss to replace an existing residence Okay So this is uh an application for an understory home on uh on Stillwater Drive That's in the North Beach area of the city Um the property is located in
the RS4 district It is an 8,000 square foot lot Um they are proposing a height of 31 feet Um the RS4 the height limits for understories were recently reduced to to uh 28 ft in the RS4 district However there was an applicability
clause that allowed anyone that had a pre-application meeting with planning prior to um I believe the date was October December maybe January Um but they they did that They met with us um um the middle of last year um they were pre they they could forego those
regulations and go under the law that was applying prior to that Um so they're here today They're applying for 31 uh foot height limit that was allowed at the time that they that they initially came to the city Um the home uh being proposed is of a contemporary style They
are requesting two waivers Um the first waiver um is related to the open space requirement for twotory elevations that exceed 60 feet in length Um on one side of the facade they are complying on the on the
um on the east side they are complying On the west side they are not So they are requesting the waiver for the west side The west side is 86 feet 10 in long Um the city code includes this open space requirement to break up long expanses of ele of side elevations Um they are proposing um an underllaying
wall plane and a step back Um however staff does recommend that some additional um recesses be incorporated perhaps some notches something else to break up that facade Um we don't want to be too prescriptive but we do think it needs some additional work that that elevation Um the second waiver pertains
to the additional 5-ft spec setback that is required for the second floor front elevation when the lot coverage is 25% or greater um it requires that 35% of the of the of the side of the second floor facing the street be set back an additional 5T In
this case the entire wall is set back 5T However they do have um um an architectural projection um that does uh encroach into that 5-ft setback for the entire length of the facade Given that the primary uh area of
the facade is set back um we feel that they're complying with the intent which is to to minimize the the imposing nature of the structure So staff is not opposed to the granting of that waiver Um the style um is again contemporary style It has varying walls with material
accent um varying wall planes with material accents um and and some metal features and some wood features Um and so staff is uh has no no concerns with the design Um overall staff is supportive of the design with those recommendation with the recommendation
that that that uh eastern elevation be be uh the recess in that eastern elevation be increased Um so with that staff recommends that the uh application be approved subject to the conditions in the attached draft order And Roelio just to make sure one of the
also reasons that it's coming before us is because it has an understory and this applicant was meeting with the city prior to the change that understory homes do not come to this board anymore Correct If if they reduced the height to
28 feet they could they could uh and they and they didn't require that waiver on the on the twotory elevation they could proceed administratively but because they want to maintain um that that height that was previously allowed and they need that waiver for the second story elevation they need to come to the
design review board That's the waiverss Yeah Um do you want to begin Uh yes Thank you Uh good morning again My name is Antonio Rodriguez I am the architect of record Um
u my offices are at uh 48 uh 08 Southwest 72nd Avenue Miami Florida So my client they're actually from Iceland and this is going to be a vacation home for them And um they
really wanted something very organic and uh you know modern but uh something organic So I we did incorporate a stone base into the house and and uh uh really came up with some wood detailing
throughout Um and uh we really liked the understory uh allowance in that it really freed up the uh the lot at the at the ground level uh where we had plenty of uh uh green area around it The green
area requirement for the understory is a little bit I think a little bit higher than the than the norm And so we do have a lot of open space around the house and uh and uh it's what the clients wanted They wanted to to free up the bottom uh
at the pool level Uh we do have um uh the living areas on the main level on the first habitable floor Uh and uh bedrooms on the third level Uh we're not
really doing anything on the roof deck Um and we do have a a nice courtyard on that on that west side It is almost double the required size We thought it
would be more impactful than than to uh uh do the same you know to do it on both sides So the the setback on the east side is a little bit uh smaller It's it's long but it doesn't uh come in as
much That allowed us to really develop the floor plan You know the lot is very small and uh it's it's all very tight So in order to get the you know the rooms uh to be more functional we needed a
little bit of of the width there Um but uh with that I think everything was pretty much covered Uh uh if you have any questions and we also have uh uh Brandon Howard here uh the landscape
architect if you have any questions uh related to landscaping So uh thank you for your time and your consideration Antonio do you want to run us through a little bit of the design elements you know using the slides or are you done Uh
absolutely Yeah if you could go to the uh to the uh site plan You can just state next slide when you'd like us to advance Oh okay No problem Next slide Uh yeah this is a contextual
um next slide please There is a a new house uh on one side and an empty lot on the other Um and there's the uh aerial Uh next slide Uh so we could use this drawing
here This is that that understory You could see the bottom level is you know in the main it's just a very open We wanted to give the feel of a of a uh you know a traditional home as well
with the the so we did a gate a front uh door or gate going into an open uh foyer if you will and that's where your main staircase is Uh and it does connect to
the carport uh that's adjacent and then you're in a in a living area If we can go to the next slide and uh all the way to the ground level where it has the furniture Uh keep
going Next slide Next slide Uh next slide please Next slide Uh next slide Or or is this it for the
Okay No go back one please Yeah So I thought we had the furniture laid out down there but basically it's a covered terrace Uh in the rendering you'll be able to see kind of the idea of the bottom but um just a
big open space uh a little conversation pit a little closer to the water and and then you see the pool and and deck around it Uh next slide please So you see the main stair there in the
towards the right coming from the foyer and you get to a nice open living area Uh and then uh you walk by the dining into the the family room kitchen area and uh all open uh you know as you walk
uh up the stair it's an uh all glass and you're looking onto the courtyard and a living wall beyond which you'll see in the renderings Um and and then you kind of walk around that courtyard to get to the family room kitchen area
Um and uh we do have at this main level a staircase going directly down to the pool uh area uh a goodiz terrace and uh and two bedrooms on this level towards the
front And uh next slide please And then the uh then we have three kids bedrooms upstairs And um and the master uh takes up the whole back back of the house Like I said not a very wide area
to work with It's 346 uh in width Uh but it is enough for a good master bedroom and bath Um and if uh next slide please uh roof Uh next
slide Uh next slide Next slide I want to get to the renderings All right So there's the front that you saw on the cover page Um and you see the different materials Like
we said that we did incorporate uh we wanted to give it an organic look We did incorporate the stone like a Dominican coral in the bottom and uh and the uh the wood detailing uh on top and in the
roof Next slide So here you could kind of see the um the the staircase We did remove obviously the neighbor the neighbor's property just so you can look in and um
and you see the living wall which which actually goes up from the main level up to the to the top level Uh next slide And the back you see kind of the
activities down there The thinking is uh uh you know an outdoor kitchen uh dining and kind of living area and then just a simple pool in the back Uh
and you see the master deck upstairs So uh yeah if you have any questions uh we'll do our best to answer them Okay thank you very much Are there any other Thank you Does that
conclude your presentation It does Okay Excellent Um any other members of the public wishing to speak The Brendan Howard has his hands raised but his hand raised but I believe um Mr Rodriguez said that was the landscape architect I if he has anything else to
add or or is that uh is he just here for questions I think he's here for questions but uh I don't know if he wants to chime in and Okay But I think he just was going to
just answer questions if if necessary Okay The lot's fairly small so the landscaping is mainly on the edges but uh but yeah Okay Okay I'm now going to close the public portion and open it up to the
board for comment Who would like to begin I guess that one question The green wall that he showed it I believe it showed it says artificial or is it actual living green wall It it is artificial
Okay And is there any reason why you can't do an actual living wall We've gotten feedback that it uh a lot of them don't do very well uh over time Um and the artificial ones are getting
better and and better and they do some of them do incorporate some uh kind of easy to maintain elements within the artificial living wall But in the mainly it's just uh
artificial Um I have a question I'm toggling between slides 21 and 22 which are a couple of the renderings Um it question about I guess the roof pitch on the the front facade and how much that extends
um beyond the structure specifically like the brown um the wooden you know box that goes around the front facade Uh it kind of looks like it extends beyond in slide 21 but then in slide 22 it's set
back and that could just be the you know the um reference point Um but just curious there because I would say I I really love the back facade the the facade that faces the water where you really don't see the the roof extending
over Um right And you know maybe maybe that could be mirrored in the front Right Yeah the front um does have a uh a separate uh lower roof for that
balcony and and then the uh the although in in in that from that angle it appears like the overhang is projecting over it Uh it it really doesn't And if you look at the one at an angle where you can see
the living wall you'll notice that the the detail over the balcony the roof detail over the balcony uh does come out a little further than the main overhang behind it
Okay Yeah And then the the the the back is actually the same It's just depending on what angle you're looking at at it the back is the same It's just a bigger a bigger covered terrace in the back since it is overlooking the water
Yeah Thank you So we wanted to soften up the We wanted to soften up the front with the same kind of detailing uh and and kind of breaking up the massing with the with the wood box below and then and then this uh layering
effect above Thank you Yeah I I agree I mean I I like that it's set back more It just I guess the viewpoint from slide 21 was deceiving Um but yeah other Yeah that was really my only question So thank you
Thank you Gabriel Do you have any comments or thoughts or do you have any comments Um I I actually have some some thoughts Um one of the things I one of the things I I re I I appreciate I really like the um
and this relates to the waiver the um the floor plan Um I know that sometimes with these niches I I've seen the interiors of some of these homes and it creates a little bit of an awkward space but I I really like the one um the deeper one that you
have and I can't tell which it's the north or the south side Um maybe it's the the east elevation and how you've been able to because of that deep niche you've used it as a way to separate out the stairwell and the elevator And um
overall internally both floors to me they seem very comfortable and and just like a nice this seems like the interior of the home is is just going to be really easy to live in Um so I wanted to to compliment you on that And I think because I'm I'm gathering that with the
waiver on the one on the east side it seems like the niche is deeper than required And so then on the west side it wasn't as deep Was that what ended up happening Um you know generally speaking I'm a bit of a stickler for again the
rules and the regulations but I think that because how you've designed it internally it works so well Uh it it doesn't um I I wish though we did have a rendering of the west elevation Is did I miss that Is that somewhere in the
presentation It's we don't have a rendering but if you go down to the isometrics you'll be able to see the full model What it's one of the last sheets Okay
Um Let's see I see Or 27 28 Oh even better Ah okay Right I I see what Yeah I don't
I don't keep going up Sorry Up a little Huh I think it was in the other direction Sorry These are the landscape sheets So it would be further back Yeah it it shows a
break It It shows no break on the two livable floors second and third And then there's an open area um or sort that makes you think it's a break and it is in the understory And so in staff staff was encouraging
that there should be a little bit more of a depth a change in depth Correct Yeah I mean I I Yeah I I mean I think that you know I want you both to keep the deeper
recess on the west side Um but also add a little bit more now that I see it a little bit more variation on the east Um and I'm just looking at the square footage I mean you have some square footage to play with What is the how deep does the recess have to be to avoid
a waiver The recess has to be eight feet deep into the building Into the building Yeah Oh So we're not saying the waiver shouldn't be granted but we're we're saying there should be a little bit more Yeah Can you show the um um on the
screen the uh layout um of the second and third floor The interior layout Yeah we could uh go up or back in the uh
Keep keep going Keep going Yep Keep going back Yep And one more Okay So yeah on the on the uh main level it's actually a a little bit of an
atrium The struggle we had with the the recess was that um you know in order to circulate around the the main courtyard uh you know if if that wall moves
anymore it kind of kills the ability to have you know the you know right-size furniture and so forth in the living and dining Um so uh we would have to
probably shift the other courtyard and make it smaller in order to grow that side And the other thing here and the other factor is that that side where the balcony is it's where we have all the equipment as well So right under that uh
recess really what we have if we grow the courtyard it's going to be kind of glorifying the generator and AC equipment and and all the equipment that you could actually see it in the ground level Mhm So we thought it made more
sense to really make the the other courtyard the the the big idea of the of the part and and leave this this one as more of a balcony uh on the bedroom level If you can go to the next
level to the uh next slide Okay So there's the equipment along the side and we had limited space to accommodate it So um and if you go uh to the to the next
floor again the ground floor Next slide Sorry in the other direction And one more Okay So here we do have a balcony at the lower level It's actually an
atrium Uh there is no balcony It's more of a of an open space um that uh uh to the to the uh basement level And on that lower level right underneath the balcony do you have glass
or I I assume it's all glass Yeah it it is all glass And one of the fears was if we do step it back more that then you're going to pick up the view into the generator which has to be at flood level
So it's you know fairly high up Um this way you kind of miss the equipment as you look out from the house So it it it seems that while there isn't a cut in the side I don't know if that
side is north south uh uh on the side of the um that we're speaking about It does break up the mass the cement on that the stuckco on that side with the balcony on
the top floor that we see here on this level the second level And then on the first level it breaks it up with the glass which is probably ceiling to floor I would think Yes Yeah Um and it does
indent a little bit in but not enough you know to the code but it does it's not a straight line Um so in in my opinion I think it it it um it meets the intent maybe not to the letter but it
meets the intent Um and yet it provides the adequate living area based on the um very slim um width of the structure There there is some I just we just were
we were looking closely at the plans and it it doesn't show in some of the render some of the site plans on the west side which is where they do have the open courtyard there is an eyebrow that we didn't realize that the
eyebrow crossed in front of the of the open courtyard So a waiver does need to be granted for that side if that eyebrow is going to be kept And it's not showing on here It it does show on this one There was another another plan that we
looked at that it was hard to tell Um and it is in the it is in one of their renderings Page 32 Yeah If you go to the renderings you'll see um the the reason for that Um you can scroll down
that one Okay Back one Oops You're talking about the sort of concrete clad correct The frame The frame The frame is is at the front of that open courtyard I I I'm sorry we missed it in our in our staff report Um but that that would
require a waiver as well Um and that's on the west side so it's not here Yeah Yeah If you can go up one on the renderings you'll see it Uh that one right there Yeah And again the idea there was just to be true to the the
concept of this plane kind of intercepting the house So it's just the just an eyebrow just to connect the front to the back and tie it all together So I think uh I think it meets the intent in that you'll you're still
going to have that open feel We did break the roof up above but ideally we it would I think aesthetically it it'd be great to keep that eyebrow cutting across there Are you all recommending
that a staff I we don't have any any uh objections to that because it does break up the the the verticality of the structure Sure I think it's it's it's a pretty good element Okay I I do have some comments though overall about the design Um and you know one of the things
that struck me is you said that that you know when you first started this that your intent um that the client wanted a very sort of organic feel Um and it seemed like you've responded to that through your choice of materials Um but when I think of organic I think of you know flowy
lines soft curves um you know natural forms There's not a lot of right angles in nature Me wrong Um however this house it's it's very very angular It's
very very boxy and then the design elements that you've added reinforce those hard right angles the boxiness etc Um so you know as I before you even said that when I was reviewing this project the other day um in preparation for the
meeting you know I was trying to think okay what what is this what is this house saying You know what's what's contributing here What's the story Um and you know one of the I think the main intent of these you know
intense you know was DRB now administry of staff review of these understories is that we don't want to create a community of homes on stilts that there should be some you know sort of incorporation of elevated design and you know one of the
impressions that I get from this design is it really feels like a house on stilts as much as I like the use of the coral on on the first floor Um and I I really like the mahogany door Um but so that would be my main my main
um comment about the overall design of the structure that you know I would like it to see in a in order to be able to better meet the intention um to be able to have some sort of softening elements
Um I also was confused by the I guess like the projection or the floating roof structure It just seems like you know there there's a lot of elements Um I don't really understand I mean I I I like this sort of exposed concrete frame
because as you were saying it does tie things together but I don't really understand the relationships between the other parts Um it especially the aluminum wood pickets Um I would say the overwhelming majority of homes that we
see have these aluminum the screening Um and it it it feels more applied rather than intentional Um so I I just wanted to encourage you to soften the structure Um I think that will also help with um
the waiver on the east side that you don't necessarily have a a niche a recess but if there were elements that that were a little bit softer um I also again I I agree with um with Laura about this It the the the projection it almost
seems like there's this double roof which is just sort of confusing like I I I'm not quite sure why it's there or what it's connected to or if it's not connected to you know I would just say choose one You know either choose the
the sort of louvered frame or choose this roof projection but having both I I I don't understand Um and I also to the point too again you know I want to be constructive Um one of the
things one of the ways in the rear that might be a fun way to incorporate a bit of personality and soften the structure would be instead of having another straight down staircase in the back directly mirroring the one that's in the
front maybe consider having um a curved staircase again to offset the sort of boxiness and the angles of the rear and the framing in those elements One thing I failed to mention was that
like I said the owners are from Iceland and Nordic architecture typically is is very functional and straight lines and that was part of the discussion and the examples that they showed me Uh and it
made sense for this property since it is very very narrow uh you know when you when you start you know creating angles or curves and it it makes the the spaces a little less functional So I just wanted to throw that in there That's
part of the thinking behind this And I think the organic side of it uh was something I was pushing with them uh to really soften up uh uh you know the the structure and uh you know the different
roofs as I explained is is an attempt to break up the massing and the height Um and I think it it it achieves that But uh but yeah those are the that was the thought process behind it
Yeah I I I I I I feel like the the design needs to be refined Um especially that front section with the double roofs you know it's I almost want to feel like choose one either have you know an overhang um that provides you know
coverage for that front balcony or do this frame and then don't have the additional roof Um but I I I think ha having both it just sort of muddies the this I it seems like what they're looking for
is something that's a sort of sort of elegant but with a simplicity to it and this is just an extra Got it Yep Let me also ask you a question too It's a little bit confusing from the rendering Um I'm looking at
page 22 when you go in the front door Um is that then an enclosed foyer or it reads on the rendering like it's it's open as well Yeah No it's it's more like a gated entry but uh again to get away
from the the the the feel of the house being on stilts like you mentioned I thought this was a good way to tie it in uh to to uh you know the more typical houses uh that don't have the understory Uh it creates you know the illusion of
the front door It's really more of a gate that goes into an open uh foyer stair area Okay Yeah that was my question Okay No because we've seen um that being an enclosed foyer So I just wanted to make sure I don't have as much
of a problem with the um the fake greenery on the the green wall I I would if it was on the front facade but um I think you know it's nice on the interior It's really just going to affect the the residents Um and I could see if they're
traveling lot not around you know you need something very low maintenance So yeah I don't know if anybody has any other comments about the design Um I don't know What are your thoughts on the design elements changes that I was
recommending Yeah I honestly u I really like the the extra layer because to me there's two parts of the house right There's these balconies and then you have and so I
wanted to bring the scale down of the balcony a little bit and help you know step back the the house The we also obviously wanted to get proper ceiling heights So then that's why we have the
the other roof behind it Uh I think uh again I I like that we're stepping it back and we're creating a cool element that's actually open uh you know gives you some privacy in the balcony but it
has the picket so you can actually see through it and it I think it ties in nicely with the with the wood veneer the the slats that we have in the front and and in the back So that was the thought behind it and in the back uh balcony or
or covered terrace Uh you know it I think it works well also It's just a whole other lower roof element So I I really like it but u I understand your comment I like the um greenery that
you've placed on the front um over over the b in front of the second floor balcony the first livable floor balcony I is that I don't think is that a reflection or is that greenery I think I think it's a reflection but I
think some planter boxes there would would work really well Oh okay Yeah it's funny because I had that same that looks like greenery on the I think that might be a way to to incorporate Yes a little to sort of soften it Um
and yeah that that might be part of the solution Um and what I'm hearing you say about the the roof structure I agree that having um on the second habitable habitable floor um to have the sort of the I don't know the screening around it
um you know it it does create that sense of privacy and maybe the additional roof structure on top is what is you know needs to be reconsidered Um again you know on the back we can't see that and it's more successful And that's what um
was brought up before That rooftop on the top floor it doesn't project as much as it appears to project on this on this front elevation If you look at the side elevation you'll see that the projection is far less That one Yeah that one Yeah
So if you take it back it really would I don't know that it would um make sense I I think it's just it's you're creating a a sort of a simple reduced structure and it's adding it's just extra It's
like adding it's like wearing too many necklaces or it's too many accessories Yeah I think because of the length and and the size if if we would remove the upper overhang uh it really would would
make it a little a little too plain and and boxy up there because it would just be the the stuckle behind it This was a way to kind of give it a more residential feel Yeah In my view And um
yeah I agree But yeah no I understand I just I just think that there's there's a bit of a gap between the intention and the execution and that it and I think that the the the problem is that there's just too many design elements being
added And so my recommendation would be to work with staff to refine the facade so that it it's a little bit more simple um to add planters to soften the front facade um whether it's on the
first story the second story I don't want to be too prescriptive and say you need to get rid of it or you need to add something in a different material or whatever that is Um I just want to be able to say okay you know what this isn't really the the intention that you have and the realization isn't quite
meshing And so you know I would recommend working with staff to refine that Um and or I would say it would be a condition of my approval of the project Um and then yeah and also too you know and I
don't know if this is possible but again I would love to not have the front facade effect here is a house on stilts You know again that also seems to me something And and again I don't I don't know how to implement that but it would be great if you know you could work with
staff I'm also wondering too you know maybe I do I do like the concrete frame and again I like how you've extended it throughout the building there It creates a sense of cohesion Maybe the solution is that those walls on the first floor
that within the concrete frame maybe those are just simple stucco and not the wood paneling and maybe that would would sort of simplify it I don't I don't know Again I think that it needs to be looked into and discussed um so that we're all you know moving in
the same direction cohesively Um I agree Thank you Yeah Um and and then in terms of the waiver I mean I don't know if yeah on that side if if there could
be something maybe even it's you know recessing the the windows a little bit more but I it's not as much of a problem to me Um and like I said I like the internal floor plan so much I'd hate to mess with that too much because again it
seems really comfortable and that's what a house should be I appreciate it Y yeah I don't have a problem with that either And uh no problem with the understory obviously and no problem with the waiver of the
second story um front elevation um which may change when you come back anyway So Madam Chair um my concern or really it's more of a question is um the
limestone um it's Dominican limestone uh versus is that something that we use here normally or just that's just for clarification purposes really No Yeah it is Dominican coral
Yeah You're asking is that a common material maybe Is it sustainable Yes Is it you know is it native to to the environment here Is it could it be used olytic limestone versus you know Dominican coral you know Yeah The Sorry
go ahead No I my understanding is coral has been used here in Miami Beach since the 1930s Russell Pan Coast and and others uh whether Dominican back then or other locations I think they you know
that I don't know but um it is a soft material softer than other stones but it is a very pretty stone Is there a difference between the coral and oolite Uh that's a great question Do you do you
know the history of the two between the two Uh to me they're very similar materials Um I I don't know what I'm sure there is a technical difference between the two I'd have to do some research on that Um let's see Let's see if I can find anything quickly Yeah the the lulite's
generally a lot rougher uh and has a lot more of the holes and so you typically have to grout it for this kind of use Um and the Dominican coral is very popular because it does have a little bit of the oolite look in terms of it's
a little bit more rustic than limestone but but it's still very workable Uh and you know fairly smooth Uh so that's that's the biggest difference So OLED's very very rough We typically use that
for the bearing uh walls along the back or something like that Thank you for the clarification And Gabriel I mean do you like that material Would you maybe have him explore to use it more or less or just I I don't I don't have an objection to it
I just thought that you know I didn't have a clarification as to why Okay But now that I understand it I'm good Okay Um Okay Any other comments Anyone want to make a motion for the waiver um to approve deny the
waiver whatever You know we can um I I can't make a motion but I can maybe suggest Do you want them to come back with a revised um based on your suggestions on design of the front of the home Do you want them to come back or do you want them to
just work or does the board just want them to work with Roelio on that or planning Um if that is the case then it doesn't need to return and we can approve the two waiverss uh before us How the understory how would we know the
comments have been addressed if it doesn't come back So actually this is a good for the newer can you maybe talk about how the process works with so don't come back So generally when the when the changes are very drastic we we usually suggest that it be continued the
applicant revise come back u when the changes are are minor in nature um typically what the board does is includes conditions in the order uh to revise x y and z uh provides some direction as to how that should be revised and then puts shall work with
staff subject to the review and approval or put uh condition subject to the review and approval of staff Um so in this case um if you wanted to approve it today from my from my notes um it would be refine the facade to simplify elements add planters to soften the
facade um from making it look one of your comments so that it doesn't look like home on stale So to me that would be increase the horizontality of the of the understory level Um so include so the so what we would do is put those three conditions in the in the order and then when they came in for building
permit we would work with them to refine the design um subject to your your direction Um so in this case I think the the changes are such that staff would feel comfortable implementing them Other times the changes you know such as in
the last application if you were to approve it with those drastic changes those those would be something we would be less comfortable dealing with I think we're close enough um to let you handle it um make a motion that we
approve the application before us um with a caveat of the three um items um stated by Roelio And if I could have a friendly amendment to also add um the concern with the over the roof overhang
Okay I mean I guess it's sort of the simplifying but to really examine the relationship between the roof overhang and the the the wooden or the the aluminum screening I I think the the whole the
whole motion is basically to look at the frontage of the home and to soften the look of it uh by possibly the roof possibly the planters you know all of the suggestions that were mentioned by
yourself and Roalio and maybe also to make sure that the materials are sustain materials being used are sustainable choices Um so moved second Sorry Second Okay So we have uh
motion to approve with the modification stated and then that includes the the the waiverss and it would actually be um waiver of the 5- foot requirement for the front facade and then the two side elevations Um well I think with that
waiver with the the the extension you know that might change if the roof line changes right because that was for the pro that waiver was for the projection right if if the project doesn't come out as far that waiver might not be necessary but I
have a feeling um they they might reduce it but that overhang in that overhang would have if they kept the overhang but removed the the projection below They would need the waiver if they kept if they removed the overhang but kept the projection below it They would still need the waivers Oh
wait Which is the projection Is it the the the sort of the frame I would say around the balcony I see So So that's I understand But that was what um Antonio said he liked that because it provided
some privacy But if you recess the building a little bit you could have that Mhm It would if if the facade was set back a little bit more that you could have that element for the privacy right and still be within the code The code sorry then
you'd be changing the footprint inside and the layout if you recess the top floor back if that's my understanding of what you're saying And so that so if we did not approve the waiver then they would not be able to put that project
the frame or they could do it but they would have to move everything back if they want if if that was what was the most important it would have to be back Correct Yeah Can we approve the I I don't know if I'm supportive of that waiver
How does that affect How how much of a vote do you need on the way Four And we're five So if it doesn't pass then we can make another motion Four I I personally would not set it
back further Um I think with the direction that's been given I think that they can improve the total front frontage of look of the property of the home Okay So we have a motion and a second
Okay We have a motion and a second to approve um with the modifications stated and the waiverss Um um all those in favor Any opposed Nay Okay Motion passes four to one
I would also say too I stand by my comment about having a circular stairway in the back It doesn't necessarily need to be needed to be part of the order but just to encourage or at least to propose it I think that would really help the design Okay
I I think those circular stairways having gone up and down one at my neighbors they look lovely and they are not practical It's a good way to kill yourself They are just so narrow and and not that that's what happened to me and
that's why I have this cane today and a bad foot but they're just they're unless they're made wider with ample space which this property does not have they're just not conducive If if it is a staircase that will be used by the
family going up and down If it's something just for every once in a while it may be fine I mean there's a lot of space but that was why I I didn't want it to be in the order or something to explore Okay
It's so pretty Uh okay Any other Are we done Um that's the That's the last That's it item Congratulations Motion passes Congratulations Um and and uh reach out if you'd like to
work with us on on uh on your revisions before you submit for a building permit Uh I think that would be helpful Um so we can dis discuss the changes that are required Um for meeting announcements uh the next meeting will be May 15th I
believe Let me double check May 15th Um and Michael Belalouch will be here on my behalf uh next month Okay So all right Okay Great Thank you very much Thank you Enjoy your vacation Thank you
Motion to adjurnn We need a motion to do we uh it doesn't hurt Okay Thank you