good morning uh welcome back to the historic preservation Board of Miami Beach hope everybody had a good uh August recess uh we're meeting today for the September 13th meeting and um I'll begin as usual by uh
with an overview of our process for each item and then I'll hand it over to Debbie um so We Begin every item here by having the staff present the item and describe their recommendations um at that point the
board May provide questions to staff regarding that description um then we'll ask the applicants to make their presentation within a limited amount of time and we ask that the applicants sit down after their application after their
presentation rather um the board at that point May assemble various questions that we may have uh based on that presentation we'll try to get all those questions out together so we ask the applicant to make note of those questions so then they can come back up to the Lector address all those
questions um and then sit back down um then we'll go to public hearing um we'll we'll check in on Zoom see if anybody's remote um um and then uh we do ask that the public um for being for the sensitivity
of of time here not repeat other other comments that have already been made uh but certainly we welcome everybody's input um at that point there may be a rebuttal from the applicant um and we ask that if the applicant does want to come back and address some of the public comments that they don't reopen their
presentation but simply address those comments in a straightforward fashion um and then we will go to the board member comment um we'll go one by one with our comments at that point um the the chair will go last
um and then we'll move on to to a motion okay and so uh I'll do my best to keep everybody in line so we can keep this moving forward until um until have I do have to leave a little early so Kirk will be taking over towards the end of the meeting okay and with that Debbie I'll
hand it over to you okay uh thank you Mr chair uh good morning members of the board and members of the public um just a a quick announcement uh we will be short one board member this morning um and as um board member lebman will not
be present uh I found out about that uh earlier this morning um we are also as the chairperson uh stated going to be losing another member around uh 11:30 or noon so I just wanted to make that
announcement we do have two applications on the agenda this morning that require five sevens vote um and I would be happy if the applicants agree to to um take those earlier on the agenda I think one is already scheduled for uh the second
item so we can we can begin with the regular order um with that I'm going to turn it over to the City attorney for the uh notice regarding uh lobbyist registration and swearing in any members who will be testifying today thank you
thank you Debbie and good morning Mr chairman and members of the board um today's meeting of the historic preservation board has been scheduled in a hybrid format with members of the board physically present uh in the commission Chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicants staff and members of the
public appearing either in person or virtually via zoom in order to participate in today's meeting members of the public may dial 1888 47544 99 and enter the webinar ID which is 817-
4834 7488 pound or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 817 4834 7488 uh before I swear in the public and staff I'd like to read the city's notice
regarding lobbyist registration if you're 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 if you're speaking only on
behalf of yourself and not any other party or if you're Tes testifying as an expert witness providing only scientific technical or other specialized information or testimony in this public meeting or if you're appearing as a representative of a neighborhood association without any compensation or
reimbursement for your appearance to express support of or opposition to any item expert Witnesses and representatives of neighborhood associations shall prior to appearing disclose in writing to the city clerk their name address and the principal on whose behalf they're communicating if
you're an AR attorney or employee representing an applicant or an objector you must register as a lobbyist these rules apply whether you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage defeat modification or continuance um and lastly Mr chairman
I'd like to swear in any members of the public or staff will be testifying today please raise your right hands do you swear under oath that any and all testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you
okay thank you Nick um first uh item this morning is the approval of the July 12th 2022 minutes do we have any uh Corrections or someone like to make a motion okay second all those in favor any opposed
okay great that passes um next we do have uh two announcements one request for continuance this morning um the request request for continuance is with regard to HPB
2104 99 this is 1445 Pennsylvania Avenue uh the applicant is requesting that the variance portion they have uh requested a variance to exceed the hours of operation for the outdoor bar counter that that variance be continued I believe to the
November meeting is that correct Mr R thank you Debbie good morning Debbie Mr chair honorable board members James R with green Mar offices 600 Brickle Avenue here on behalf of the applicant uh we've actually changed uh that
request around a bit um and uh we're actually going to be withdrawing the request for the variant on the outdoor bar counter today um we had uh we've been having some discussions with the neighborhood association including late last night and uh our client um in order
to show as much good faith as possible um has chosen to just withdraw that variance request um get the project uh underway and after operating and establishing a uh good a track good
track record and relationship with the neighborhood we'll then reway whether it's appropriate to come back and apply for that down the road so we're withdrawing that request and would like to just continue with the certificate of appropriateness portion I have a
question I may um um in a situation like that thank you in a situation like that when they decide to come back for which seems they will are they here or boa they would be
coming back to this board thank you you're welcome thank you um so that that variance request has been withdrawn without prejudice since it was not presented to the board today um and similarly we have uh HPB
22051 17 um this is for the Ocean Terrace Park uh the applicant has also advised the planning department that they have withdrawn their variants to exceed the hours for their outdoor bar counter as well so we will not be hearing that
today if that comes back at a certain point to Mr clean's point that would be coming back to the historic preservation board but uh currently it is withdrawn so they would have to file again and just the variance and they would have to file again in and that
would have to be fully noticed um in accordance with the with the noticing regulations so just those two quick announcements and then we can move on to the first regular application of the agenda which is HPB uh five HPB excuse me 22
532 um 1116 Ocean Drive an application has been filed requesting a modification to the previously approved uh after the fact certificate of appropri ress for the installation of a canopy structure at the ground level specifically the applicant is requesting the deletion of
a condition requiring that the canopy be removed after 2 years um this particular application was approved uh two years ago on September 8th 2020 um this was for the installation of a um a canopy structure
covering outdoor seating within the uh Courtyard portion of the C AAS Arena property also known as the Versace Mansion um staff has evaluated the structure I think um most people probably don't even know it's there it
is minimally visible from certain Vantage points only um we do not believe that this uh structure has had any type of negative impact on the uh contributing building or the historic district and we are supportive of the applicant's request um and are
recommending that the board approve uh the application thank you good morning Ken Harrison Robbins with offices at 242 Northeast 27 Street in Miami um I represent the owners of the kasaas arena and we want to thank you and this board
for its previous approval of this uh uh essentially it's a temporary retractable canopy structure it can be taken down at any time if necessity calls for it um we have put that up there and we're enjoying the the use of it and the
public is enjoying the use of it as you probably remember it was very restrictive to get into the kasaas arena before my clients took it over and now they've opened up to the public and as tens of thousands of people each month enter the facility and enjoy the tours
throughout the facility so it's really become a public area and of course I'm sure you've DED there been had an opportunity to sit in there and it's a wonderful environment that's created by this canopy uh let's run through the presentation real quickly if we may next
next page next thank you so this is the kabes structure and the East Elevation you can show with the dark uh lines where the structure is next line next next slide
so you can see in reality it's not even visible from Collins Avenue next slide let's go I'm Excuse me Ocean Drive I I stand corrected the next this is uh A
View From I believe uh 15th Street and and uh excuse me 12th Street and as you can see it's not visible from that street the side street either you yes next slide 11 Street 11 Street I
don't know what's going on with me today 11 Street I think my arm is in the way way um so 11 Street as you can see from 11 Street it's not visible at all let's go to the next next slide you can see from uh Ocean Drive
once again from across from the park it's not visible next slide and this is from 11th Street once again from AC course the street it's not visible next slide please as you can see caddy Corner uh
across 11th and Ocean Drive uh you can see that there's no visibility of the structure next slide this is what it looks like inside when we retract the canopy most of the time we don't retract the canopy because
it gets so hot and uh we try to retract it every once in a while during the day and the guests do not like that do not like having the sun directly hit them people do not go to dining to have direct sunlight so most of the time it is closed next next slide
please and so this is just a layout on the ground you can see in plane what it looks in plan what it looks like next slide and this shows how it's a temporary structure basically there's metal um base around the base of each of
the columns and uh it could literally be literally be detached from that metal base the metal base is not visible at all all from the when you're on the grounds so once you detach it and unscrew it it disappears from the site
when you if we want to take it down next slide I think that's the last slide so that completes the visual presentation um we have enjoyed the use of it the public has enjoying the use of it it has as Debbie said there's no real impact on the existing contributing
structure and we would appreciate the uh removal of the condition of the requirement to remove it within the two-year period and remove that of course staff can always ask us to come back and revise review enhance uh right now we don't believe that' be
appropriate I don't believe the staff would thank you very much thank you staff for working so hard on this project thank you for your presentation I'll ask the board if anybody has any questions for the applicants and we'll just get them all
out at one just quickly um you know like being a temporary removable structure would this be required to be taken down if we had a hurricane coming I was going to ask the same thing anybody any other questions yeah my my only question is uh in reference to
those 4x4 steel footings or I guess they're there really for uplift mainly it's all been studied and engineered let's let's let them get the question out first and then you can answer all of them together I'm sorry so my my question in reference to those is there um yeah I'm always concerned about
oxidation rust um with steel on Miami Beach so um that and then I'm also I'll just I'll just put it out there they were given this temporary approval um you're essentially in violation as of a week or so ago and
come to us kind of again after the fact so um we made our application excuse me excuse me sir let's wait so I'm just I'm just putting my feelings out there um that's it but I'd like some reference on
that steel okay any any other board questions Kirk a question just going excuse me sorry about that um going back to when this uh application originally became or came
before the board I know it came before the board a couple of times and the concern was um the compatibility and I as presented um I'm not saying that I have objections um but at the same time you
know I wouldn't say that it's any more compatible with the existing structure than it was originally um and I think perhaps for some board members maybe that was a hope with making a temporary uh possibly opening the door to um something that was more compatible in
the future so my question sorry for being a little longwinded is what what jurisdiction if this condition is removed does the city have to want to change it in the future or by removing this condition uh does it even though
it's a temporary structure uh as far as uh the city's jurisdiction technically become permanent thanks Kirk maybe we'll ask Deb or Nick to address that and then the applicant can address the other questions and if I can make a comment
without necessarily having any questions I had the Good Fortune it was the first time all these years I've lived in Miami Beach that I actually went there and dined a couple of weeks ago I wanted to celebrate a good occasion with a a friend and his family we went there for
lunch on a weekend and uh at first it was the hottest day and so so sure the the structure it has fans underneath it so the people dining there and yeah if you
need to be here so actually we went inside and then it rained uh really hard and everybody had a squeeze in and uh I see how essential this structure is for the business I I hear people talking
about compatibility and concerns and that's great if we could help them do a better job but whatever they need that in order to have their business to have the people dining there and uh if if
there's no no no no alternative that we're we're we're we're looking at I have no problem just saying continue what you're doing because if it's not broken why fix it okay thank you um I think I can address two two of the board member
questions um Mr kleene you're correct we are a few days past the two-year Point um but we have been working with the applicant since June um there was no August meeting because we do have a recess um so staff would not consider
this an additional after the fact request they did submit their final full set of plans in in fully complete application form well before the 2-year period it was just a scheduling uh matter in terms of not being able to get
them back until the September meeting um and the second question with regard to your approval so if the if the board strikes the condition then you're correct the applicant is is permitted um to keep the
canopy in perpetuity now there are property maintenance issues um obviously if if they if the canopy which is by nature a temporary structure begins to deteriorate they would be in violation of our property M maintenance standards
um um they could repair it they could uh change the fabric without coming back to this board but any increase in size of the structure or any significant design changes would be coming back to this board would the applicant now like to address the other questions that were
brought up well I think the real issue is is will it deteriorate to a level where it would become unsafe and I think that's your concern and it should be a concern from my understanding it's stainless steel that's on the base the base itself is made out of stainless steel and that
is what prevents the uplift it does meet hurricane standards and would be able to withstand up to 155 mph wind so the intent of the of the owner would be to take it down if we had a hurricane warning we' take down the the actual kopy structure um but not the full
structure unless unless our Engineers told us to do otherwise but uh we think what's unique about it is I agree with you that it's not is you look at it it obviously wasn't designed back in uh
when the kasaas arena was built nor when the other adjacent structures were built but the very purpose of design review is to clearly identify those things that are part of the original contributing structure and what really isn't it would
be foe to make it look like it was dated back in the 30s or the 50s or when the um hotel that was there that was demolished so it wouldn't solve that problem um we did try to look at other
Alternatives like putting a a wood around the columns and things of that nature and it just didn't work you know it did not look appropriate just stand out with this minimalist process it's probably the best that could be done to
have that type of level of function um and it really does make a difference and people do enjoy this facility and Love kasaas Arena it's a favorite of almost everybody that goes there they're excited about it and I appreciate your
listening to this presentation and I urge your support of this project thank you thank you I think at this point we'll go to public hearing um before we open the uh public hearing are there any disclosures the board members wish to
make no disclosures okay I see there is someone on Zoom with a telephone number ending in 060 and I would just ask the caller first to State their name and then I can swear them in caller if you could unmute yourself
if you would wish to comment on this application Mr chair I do not see the caller unmuting their themselves so if we could go to anyone in uh commission Chambers present who would who would wish to comment good morning my name is Matthew
ganof and I'm speaking on behalf of the Miami Design preservation league and I have have registered with the city clerk Daniel Sado the executive director has a scheduling conflict and is regrettably unable to attend this morning but he does send his best
regards I also want to remind the public and the attendees here today that our positions on this application and others are available publicly on our blog at mdpl do.org BL thank you and on this particular
application we support the project according to the staff recommendations subject to it being clear that the canopy is not a permanent structure and that the canopy should not be further modified thank you okay thank you now we're going to go
back to zoom caller 0600 okay uh I do not see them unmuting themselves so with if there are no other members of the public wishing to comment we can caller on Zoom with the phone number 0600 do you wish to
comment no my question has been address thank you okay thank you um with that we can close the public comment okay um moving on to board comment would anybody here like to start
us off Kirk just as a followup to the the question I asked um just a couple of points uh I don't I don't begrudge uh the use of this structure and the need for this
structure um at the same time uh aesthetically um I mean it looks a little bit like a pool screen it's not really um you know very designed um also this particular property I know has gone through a lot
of different uh varied Renovations and and changes um specifically the the Versace changes which were sweeping um so by my pointing that out I'm not trying to say that I expect it
to go back to the 20s or something to look like that um but where I'm a little challenged and this goes to the mdpl comment and to to Debb's feedback that for all intents and purposes it does become a permanent structure and again I
don't begrudge it being there I understand the use the practicality of it uh my only question is uh would there be any sort of lever that could be included within the uh motion that would give the city at a future date
jurisdiction to ask for something else if they wish to I don't know if something of that nature would exist but uh for the current time I don't have a problem with it being there have a more of a concern with it being a permanent
structure uh related to to this historic property yeah I I find that the structure to be pretty uh nondescript so it doesn't it serves as purpose the the rest of the the design for the interior
spaces and common areas is you know any other way to describe them or maybe over the top um so to put another over the top um it item in there would really sort of not sit well with me um so I
don't have a problem with this nondescript structure so much um I have a problem with what Kurt alluded to um with it becoming permanent when it when it's not so I I would I
would hope that any um motion made for this would uh reinforce that this is not a permanent structure and that there would be no discussions at all of future variances
allowing for alterations that increase height or area of this uh temporary structure you'll have a chance to rebut at some point um Sergeant could I ask the applicant to just remain seated till
the board gets through the comment thanks so I think that that's my main thing that this is not a permanent structure and any future changes um would have to come to this board and any future changes that were requesting an
increase in area or height of this structure would would not be considered and I I would agree to a motion that that included those those elements well I agree with the comments that it
doesn't detract from all the other very interesting and unique elements of the property it serves its purpose um so it's important but I I I don't understand uh where we're
getting and really I just don't understand the the difference between permanent in temporary I understand that if A hurricane's coming they can disassemble it and it's so so to me it seems like it's not permanent it may be
used there they they can change the materials as needed but it's not permanent if it could be easily taken down and put away so I don't know why we're even considering it a permanent structure because it's not a fixed
structure that cannot be removed my only comment would be and steuart can say he was there for lunch I bet you he didn't even notice the canopy because of all the other beautiful features of the property you know you look at the table setting you look at the building and all
of that you sit down you enjoy it it's not like you're going to look up and say oh my God I don't like this I mean so I think the the less uh attractive it is or the less uh noticeability that it presents is exactly that it's not noticeable so I think we should approve
this and I would make the motion to do that oh um anybody else I I I mean I love the property it's such a special place every every friend that comes to visit always wants to come to the property and I think the current
ownership has done a great stewardship of reinvigorating the property so anything to encourage the vitality and usability of that space um I'm all for I I do hear um The Other Board member comments and I would agree that as long
as it maintains its current form and shape I'm I'm in support of it okay and I I would only add that I I understand where Kirk is coming from here um you know the the language of of this form of contemporary architecture
really speaks to the dir of creativity and design compared to where we were in the 1920s I mean this is just an ex a such a beautiful place that you might expect any intervention to maybe not mimic it but equal it in in quality and
character um however I do think that one of the characteristics of this canopy uh really makes it work and that's its height it's 14 feet tall so when you're in there it really does hover over your head um and I think uh as was described
here really doesn't interfere with the uh with the rest of the architecture and in fact does provide a great um service to the clientele so that being said um it sounded like there was interest in a motion I move to
approve and I'll second that then if there' be um interest in a friendly amendment to include language that there would not be um we would not consider a a f any future variance on this uh
temporary structure that would increase inase its height or its area M Mr chairman I just like to respond on the Mr Klein's last suggestion um an applicant has a right under the code to apply for for modifications to an existing approval so any approval would
have to come before you but this board cannot foreclose someone from filing an application in the future okay I I withdraw I mean we do have there are elements I guess in the zoning code that say no variance but I
guess what you're saying is if you've been given approval you have a right to come back um Mr Klein I think we we could and and thank you Nick for that clarification you could require that any future changes include that include an
increase in area or an increase in height be brought back to this board we could include a condition you know we can't presume what the outcome of the board's decision will be at that time but we could at least require them to come back if the structure shall shall be modified to be you know proposed to
be larger taller then I would modify my request of an amendment to include any um changes in heer area be brought back to this board okay gor agrees with that change does the maker of the motion
agree with that okay um so then I'm going to call the role uh Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Pascal yes Mr Klein yes Mr Brin Mr Reed yes Mr chairman yes okay the motion passes
congratulations okay we can move on to the next application on the agenda which is HPB 21499 this is 1445 Pennsylvania Avenue an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the partial demolition renovation and
restoration of the existing building the construction of a ontore rooftop Edition in active roof deck uh the variance to exceed the hours was withdrawn by the applicant um subject structure originally known as the penway apartments uh was constructed in 1939 it
is a contributing building um an excellent example of the Streamline modan Style located within the Espanola Way uh local historic district uh the applicant is currently requesting uh approval for the a partial one-story rooftop Edition and active roof deck as
part of an overall renovation and restoration of the existing building uh the rooftop Edition is situated at the Eastern side of the roof um that will contain restrooms mechanical room and a storage room uh Additionally the
applicant is proposing to extend um a a new El to extend the existing Eastern stair and provide a new elevator um within the the Rooftop area um staff would note that although the
addition is set back approximately 14 ft from espanol away uh it will still be visible from across the street uh the city code does provide the historic preservation board with discretion to modify the line of site requirements for rooftop
additions um staff believes that um you know a small minor change would would satisfy the conditions in order to Warrant the board um to modify that line of site uh we are recommending that the deck itself including the guard rail be
set back a minimum of 4T from the outside face of the parapet walls uh finally staff would note that we are extremely pleased with the architect's plan for the uh restoration of the building um they are restoring the
exterior of the building entirely consistent with the historical documentation including the reintroduction of the signage pylon so um we are very supportive of the application and are recommending approval subject to the conditions in
our draft order if you don't have any questions for me we can turn it over to the applicant good morning Mr chair honorable board members thank you for hearing our application today in 1445 Pennsylvania
Avenue my name is James Ral from greenspoon martar with office at 600 brookl Avenue here on behalf of the applicant here with me today are my colleague Adrian Noto by Zoom our client Gerald bhana who's directly behind me and the project architect Charles Benson
um as Debbie indicated and as you heard earlier uh we withdrew the variants requesting uh extension of hours of operation for the outdoor bar counter on the roof so that's gone um of course your staff report recommends approval
and um as I Ed to earlier with regard to our withdrawing the variance request um we had a productive meeting with the neighborhood association for finga Park uh last night and we of course want to always continue our community
interaction but um there were certainly some questions about the variant so uh in a good faith effort um to show the applicants willingness to work with the neighborhood um that's why the who drew the variants um and they
would want to establish a good track record in the neighborhood of being responsible operators um and continue to interact with the neighborhood um as a result we're here on the certificate of
appropriateness for the renovation and restoration um so I'm going to turn it over to the project architect Charles Benson he he does have a few items in the staff report to go over with you um so I'll turn that over to him now and the audio visual department
for posting the uh plans good morning board members and City staff my name is Charles Benson uh from Charles H Benson associate Architects with offices at 1665 Washington Avenue second floor uh first
off I'd like I want to give my thanks to the city staff uh for all the support they've had with me on this project we've been working for a long time and helped me expedite a lot of items including um some selective demolition we've already uh submitted and got
approved for you know new windows complying with all the new um following all the historic elements uh next we could skip the Landscaping plan so next next so actually go back we could work with the Landscaping plans let's go back
to the first okay great so basically um our existing building uh from runch right to the property line on the it sign uh on the west and on the
South Side uh currently the sidewalk is very large so we're introducing to uh inground Planters also there's a lot of um issues with elevations here it's uh the slope is really exceeding all code
requirements so we're proposing uh on the public right away a slight ramp and a landing at the main entrance the uh proposed uh hotel as you'll see will be entered from the east side of
the property next so the um go next next presentation sorry well basically to give you an overview of the project um this space
has uh since 1939 uh the existing Corner use was the penway uh drugstore and also there was two retail spaces over the years the place has changed uh many forms the last used was a restaurant called Tantra which occupied the entire
ground level currently we are going to gut the entire ground level and we're putting in a new restaurant uh on the second floor there was an existing 4unit apartment building that's been abandoned for many many years so what we're doing is converting
that into seven hotel rooms and the extra area where we're not building out another unit will be the lobby and welcoming area we're also proposing to activate the rooftop with a um a series of
seating areas and uh water features we'll be accessing that with an elevator coming in from the east side of the building so basically the hotel is not really part of the restaurant the restaurant is basically uh operating on
its own and then the hotel guest could then go up to the rooftop deck we are completely restoring the exterior of the building in detail including the original windows and Grill work over the windows currently we are in permitting right now
for concrete restoration of the whole building while they're putting the presentation up um the only items on the list which is CA which Debbie brought up was uh she was recommending
um the uh um railings to be pushed back to four feet currently we have a perimeter landscaping area of about two feet and uh we have a perimeter hedge which we were proposing to do a cable railing within the
Hedge sorry about okay great um so you see on the ground level the entire ground level is activated by an entire restaurant currently the original Tantra restaurant was entering
on the west side but closer to the North and I thought it was more appropriate to use the celebrated Corner entrance as the entrance to the hotel and seal up the West Side entirely originally there were two retail stores there with doors
which were closed up from some time and also the skirting of the keyone was demolished in those entrances but staff uh felt that it was better that we continue the skirting so we basically try to keep all
the people queuing and noise at the corner further away from the residential area as you could see on the Southeast Corner we have a slight ramp up and actually that would be the entrance to the hotel and the Upper
Deck with the elevator on the east side the two stairwells are existing but they're they're going to be rebuilt based on uh uh accessibility to the second and the roof level ground level will have a
kitchen bathroom area dining area and you could actually see the new proposed in ins sidewalk tree Wells on the West Side softening up that facade and sidewalk area next as you could see on the second
level there's basically the building is broken up into four quadrants uh four units on the North side and four bits on the south side which we're only occupying three rooms three Bays for hotel rooms on the Southeast corner will
be the uh Lobby from the elevator check in Boutique area next once we get up to the new active roof deck the elevator uh ends there the stairs terminate up there as well
we have a series of perimeter seating area some are elevated some are recessed we have within a series of lagoons in the center area we have a bar with um a series of metal trellis structures over
the center water feature and waterfall area on the northeast side we have a series of bathrooms and mechanical rooms as well as a dumb waiter that will go down to the restaurant for any type of service
next oh you could go back I'm sorry you will see that the perim we have a perimeter uh hedge on the north west and south side and partial east side we're proposing to put a cable rail within that hedge area so it's not
visible from uh any line of sight next as you could see the upper upper roof uh the distance is from the uh roof structures over some of the seating areas and the trell structure the
rooftop addition is very very narrow and long on the east side of the building which will also house all the mechanical equipment including the uh uh grease exhaust system next this is the west elevation as uh
the upper part is as existing today the lower area is as proposed uh as you could see the only entrance on the E on the west side is in the center which access the uh the hotel and roof deck which is basically an emergency
staircase and the corner entrance all the windows will be will stop at the Keystone um skirting which will be restored and the uh aluminum Grill work uh above the window the the original Grill work was because the space never
had AC but we're reintroducing the grill work and screening it from the back you could actually see the Hedge on the roof which is where we're proposing the cable railing from inside we're also in reintroducing the corner pylon sign as
you could see in your historical report and in microfilm next on the lower right side is the South elevation as you could see the ground level windows and Grill work restored above the windows and on the
East end it's a full Grill work over the Keystone all the windows will be casem windows again the pylon side restored you see the Hedge on the roof and beyond all the uh additional construction we
also provided a perspective view on the upper left corner that shows the activity on the roof next this is the East Elevation with the addition hedge and screening for the mechanical
deck next North elevation originally to the building there was a series of some windows and mechanical uh electrical panels we've cleared all that up and the only uh access on the North End is a sec
second means of ESS second level with the new windows roof level with the hedge and the new addition and screening of the mechanical equipment next this is the contextual elevation on the top of the west
elevation basically everything is as original except for the Hedge on the lower level is the uh drawing from end the end the street on espanol way next
this is a section looking East through the seating area water feature in the middle we have the up detail of the metal trellis on the upper left corner next section through the elevator
and section through the bar area and planter area and hedge next these are the proposed renderings as you could see in a photograph that's part of your staff report we are kind of
following the same uh color of the building and we're showing there the the proposed trees on the west side and the hedging Up on the Roof plus the rooftop addition next views of
[Music] the upper deck area with the seating areas trellises water features waterfall next cross sections through the deck in
perspective next that's it thank you for your presentation okay uh um thank you great um we'll now ask the board if they have any um questions for the applicant we'll try to get them all out and we'll ask then ask the
applicant to come back and address those questions any any questions here have two questions first is um are there plans to have like a valet drop off and pick up in front of the
restaurant or the the all you know the hotel restaurant everything there and the second one is if they would consider removing the word drugs from the top of the building since it's not a drug store it's going to be a club and a hotel and it's across the street from a KDA uh
school I think it'll be an appropriate to have the word drugs over a club and hotel in a residential neighborhood across from a school just a moment we'll we'll wait to get everybody's questions out and you can address it I understand I wasn't SW in so I'd like to swear in on my
testimony I just gave sure do do you swear that the testimony you've given and will give is the truth all truth nothing but the truth I do thank you other board questions Barry you have questions that I want
to be addressed um the the what kind of finishes are being proposed in this Lobby um I'm not sure how the design The Proposal addresses the needs for noise
control and um living with the uh adjoining neighbors and an area um I'd like some sort of explanation from the architect about
um where does this roof structure come from what does this relate to um you know I see this Whimsical design but I'm wondering what is it just a flower put on on top
um and and I think that's oh yeah I um I didn't catch completely in in the presentation the this cable rail um that you want to put up its height versus the height of this um
cable structure steel structure that's it anybody else Laura I just like more description on the um the canopies Up on the Roof you know you talk talk about them being
chuses but I'm assuming that there's something that's going to stop the rain from coming down and the Sun from coming through you really didn't say anything about that thank you uh thank you for the presentation um I wanted to get more information on the
interior of the ground floor if anything um original would be maintained um that wasn't described and then um I think it's a beautiful project my only concern was um specifically on the the East and North elevations where you're extending
to the rooftop it seems like a continuation of the existing historic architecture so did you um tried to find any sort of differentiation between the two um and this was um sheet
a13 thank you Laura Kirk yes so I think my question is is possibly a combination for staff Andor the applicant uh has to do with the uh first of all thank you for the presentation um I'm excited about the
project U my question has to do with I believe what our uh uh histor iCal features on the second floor um specifically the uh what appear to be the original Art Deco iron rails uh
fireplaces I'm sort of interested in knowing um which of those fall within what would be categorized as public spaces or not and uh even though it appears from the drawings even though it's not referenced that the fireplaces are being maintained I'm not sure that
they are and uh so I wanted to to ask that question those two questions thank you um thanks everyone I um I guess there were a number of questions here I also had a question about the uh the new
uh roof deck that's going to be carrying a lot of water that's a lot of new weight on the roof so you know if you could talk about that new structure and the potential impact it might have on the vertical structure of the building um hopefully you know we're not interrupting the character of the
architecture with any new support and with that I'll invite you to come back and address uh these items okay great so I'll work backwards in reference to the new loads So currently we've submitted plans for concrete restoration drawings uh we've
done uh a lot of U exploratory uh the building is on spread footings it's not on pilings and basically what we're doing under the concrete restoration drawings you know any rebar that's getting replaced will be with you know the proper size rebar for the new
loading uh we're changing the loading basically on the second floor you know we're going to be removing the roof entirely it's a wood roof and there were load bearing demising partitions that whole system is being completely changed uh we're going to be proposing groud injection around the entire perimeter of
the site and that would be under the new plan as well as as reinforcing any existing columns with the c channels so that's already been taken into account with the concrete restoration drwings that already going through the city we don't have any comments yet so we're waiting to do that and yes there'll be
uh more loads now if you look at the building card the building card states that it was designed as a three-story building for the construction and the foundation currently it's a two story I've uh EXC I've excavated the foundations what you see on the sections
are exactly what exists there basically spread footings no pilings we've done test borings so we already know exactly what we're up against when we do the final design so that responds to the Loading
as far as um the internal finishes on the restaurant there's absolutely no finishes actually it's really strange when you enter the corner of the uh building it actually slopes up in the space about four to five inches it's
very weird so we're that's why we're actually going to be leveling that out there is no historic finishes no terazo or anything like that and the floor has been cut up so many times for all the previous uses I think besides the restaurant I think there was a bakery
before so there's really no no elements and if there was I would have preserved it all the exterior elements will be 100% preserved they're actually in great condition on the exterior including the metal Grill work in the center staircase
that's the original one with the little planner in the front uh I've stripped some of the perimeter Keystone uh skirting around the building it's actually a green color uh and that we'll be restoring and
replacing as needed we've done a previous project on Lincoln and drexo which we actually came back and replicated 100% the entire skirting and that worked out very well um as far as the trellis goes a lot of the trellis is decorative and not
structural especially the one over the the main water feature there's some other uh smaller trellises that act like a structure that which is over the covered bar but all the other areas are completely open and we show a detail in
one of the drawings a section through that uh Whimsical trellis the design is a bit Whimsical we try to be you know of the times especially you know when there's a new restaurant coming in everybody wants
to be have a new uh flare so this week the New Concept was uh that came up which also will be part of you know the hotel rooms will also be a bit Whimsical as well so we'll carry that same language uh from the hotel rooms to the
upper deck and we did pretty accurate renderings of really what the ex the finishes are going to be up there as far as the cable railing go it's basically uh standard cable railing uh 40 you know to comply with the 42 in height the
hedges are planned to be five 5 and 1/2 ft so it the idea was not to encroach or be visible from the exterior again um with all these you know Whimsical shapes and booths and everything we felt that
you know 4T was a bit exess if it's not really visible um especially from the with the hedges in place but we you know if we have to introduce some language that the hedges always have to be maintained would be
great as far as the sound goes the when we first approached the building the client we were basically mimicking what was there before on Tantra the entrance was from the west side and I pushed very hard with my client to bring it to the
corner I work with staff they allowed me to seal up the bottom of the entrance and skirting so that really cleaned up the whole West facade and the only uh entrance on the West End is actually the open stairwell to the roof so when it
rains water will be really coming down that stairwell that's how it originally was so um as far as sound goes I mitigated as much as possible for the entrance in the queuing which I know it's a big problem and I tried to keep it as far away from
the residential side from the North End which I think I I did a pretty good job as far as sound mitigation from the roof um again um the only thing I was proposing is a tall hedge and basically I would assume the sound would go would
mitigate straight up and just to add to uh Charles comments he did address um some noise mitigation just in the structure itself but um in addition with regard to noise mitigation and uh valet drop off and pickup there will be uh
valet but those items will be specifically addressed um to the planning board the aggregate Patron occupancy uh as proposed requires planning board approval so those are since those are specific criteria in the planning board approval process we we
will address those there uh fully and naturally that's a public hearing so uh the neighborhood would would be involved in that as well not sure how it was handled before with Tantra but for many years everybody knows the space so basically the use has maintained the
same use um as far as the historical features again we're uh keeping everything we did uh there is a few fake fireplaces inside the apartment units which right
currently um they're very very small they're interesting pieces but currently we don't have any plans on keeping them we could donate them if staff would like that sense somewhere during our selective demo
we've kept them we've stripped all the building completely but we've kept each one of these little fireplaces so as you could see in the in the pl so we could donate them to the city like and as far as the Rooftop
addition normally we try to be completely different in architecture we've kept a couple of the elements um it was a bit challenging because we also didn't want a very Stark wall on the east side um as far as the uh opening from the um stairwell we've changed the
pattern on the glass we've introduced some small eyebrows and some windows but if staff has an issue with that uh we could work with staff about that but I just didn't want to really have a Stark wall up there but I could work with
staff you know we did so show some element of scoring but we could improve that if staff wants that um and I think that addresses all Charles can you just hopefully it answers all the comments address uh Mr
Reed's question about the uh signage oh I'm sorry I didn't intentionally leave that out so you know I always follow the code and the code always says if there was a sign there you could you know replicate it and it's the exact
copy whether it has to do with the restaurant or not I understand the negative connotation of having the word drugs there especially across the street from a school but the first thing was to replicate the pylon as far as the copy
goes if uh I'm allowed by code unless there's a variance that we have to change the the the text on that uh we could put uh the word Tantra which we're going to keep that the name which the client I think owns the the the the the
name now the only problem is is Tantra has an extra syllable so if staff is okay and the board members are okay if the pylon sign could go higher this way we keep the proper copy size and maybe grow another letter up that's what we
would like if that's okay I wonder does it need letters um if that's an issue well we my client would like to put his sign up there you know and at least it would read that was the purpose of the pylon
sign the word drugs was of the replication not right it was there's no there it's not like they're going to be selling drugs in the restaurant and and just to follow up on that so this is is considered a historic
element of the building the signage we we don't consider it um in accordance with their signage regulations um which a roof sign would not be permitted as a new sign however as a as a reconstruction of a historic sign we we actually the code encourages
that um to change the copy uh the change of copy is allowed um for historic signage um but that would need to be authorized by this board so I think during your deliberations we can discuss that and
staff would have no objection to changing the copy um to Tantra and possibly raising the signage the pylon a little bit higher to make up for the extra syllable yeah I think we would need to
look at that but we can maybe discuss that during deliberations okay either making the the are smaller or fitting in the existing pylon uh would also be an option but we can we the board can discuss that um I don't think there were any other
questions for me to to Kirk Mr Pascal's Point um the public interior spaces are what the historic preservation ordinance um covers non-public Interiors are exempt from the certificate of
appropriateness criteria the apartment units in the upper floors are considered non-public interior spaces um I appreciate the applicant's willingness to donate the fireplace to the city um I'm not in the position to accept such
donation um I'm not aware of any facility that the the fireplaces would you know be be helpful for the city to introduce but um it's certainly something that you know we appreciate and and you know somewhat of a higher
authority could potentially want these fireplaces um but we're not in the position to to accept them at this point I don't if I could just ask for further clarification so the upstairs corridors are those public spaces or not
no those were private apartment corridors okay thank you and there is no intent to preserve any of the original iron work is that correct no there is I would never touch
those all of this they're existing and they'll stay existing the existing iron work in the corridors will stay in the on the west elevation of the stairwell that's the the iron work okay the fac my question absolutely and again uh as
Debbie knows I preserve anything historic and looked at those little fireplaces they're they're really small little cute items just that curiosity to have asked the question I mean if they're a part of the original authenticity of the building and they're
so small why why remove them well the layouts are completely different I could speak to my client if there's some place I could reintroduce them maybe maybe in the lob in the uh welcoming area if I if I could incorporate at least one of them
I will so I'll I'll go back and relook at that and again we've stripped the entire building upstairs completely and we've left the little elements for the time being just in case thank you I appreciate all your answers to
these questions and in the in the course of your answering them with regard to the sign I had another question for you um I'm looking at at this at the the unit layout and it looks like they they all interlock it's it's kind of not a
very common Arrangement it looks like there's in some cases um the furniture varies to include what looks like a long dining table right I don't think there's a big kitchen here no no no so basically they're communicating just to finish the
thought you know if the sign goes to uh goes from drugs to Tantra may also raise a red flag with the community and you might want to consider you know getting input um from The Neighbors on that okay uh well basically communicating doors
are a standard feature in most hotel rooms so basically if someone wants to rent two rooms you have it or you could even go to three rooms or you could go to four rooms and then we showed again I I show everything as staff knows so for
instance if someone wants to rent it out and have uh a dinner or special or conference or something like that they could set up tables and chairs and we have a dumb waiter so we could always uh serve so it's it's about generating
income and you know and having a lot of flexibility so you could join four rooms or you could join three rooms or two or combinations and just to address the uh the signage that we did have some discussion with uh the neighborhood association about that and uh there was
a preference uh I I don't speak for the association of course but just what I heard a preference for Tantra as opposed to drugs too and we explain to them it related to the uh replication not not a choice but it sounds like there's a
solution um thank you for addressing all those questions I think uh we can move on to uh disclosures and public comment are there any disclosures to be made okay seeing none uh we will open the public hearing are there any members
of the public on Zoom wishing to speak if so please raise your hand our first uh speaker is Frank good morning Frank do you swear that the testimoni you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do good morning
everyone thank you you have you have three minutes let mece uh let me introduce myself I'm a resident of the Chelsea condominium it's the building right adjacent to the to the property in question that you have been discussing so far uh Chelsea is
approximately a building of 24 units on two floors approximately the same height of the Tantra of the Tantra building uh the building is actually 10 ft away from
Tantra and uh the bedroom and the layout of the Chelsea condominium is such that most of the bedrooms face actually the side of Tantra where the rooftop is being built or is being
proposed essentially what you would have is bedrooms there are a little bit lower than the rooftop so when residents come home in the evening after a long day of work that's where the entertainment part of Tanta
would start obviously this is a cause of major concern and is is a surprise that these type of projects are being proposed right in the middle of the neighborhood because there's no other entertainment venues on Pennsylvania
Avenue or the corner of with Panola uh it is Tantra is totally surrounded by residential buildings 10t apart from that in front there is a school and on the opposite side of Tantra still on on on
Pennsylvania there are there are only residential buildings if you walk from Fifth Street all the way to Lincoln Road on Pennsylania there's no entertainment area uh and I just want to voice my concern and my opposition because this is one of the
board members as mentioned it's a club with an occupancy up to 70 people although there are only seven hotel rooms uh being proposed on the second floor so I ask the board to
reconsider the viability of having a rooftop we of course I'm very pleased that finally after many years the venue is being brought back to to its original Beauty but we cannot be pleased as
residents to have 10 ft away from our bedrooms a rooftop bar thank you very much for your attention thank you um I see Olga on Zoom Olga would you like to speak good morning do you swear that the testimoni
you'll give this proceeding is the truth all truth and nothing but the truth yes I do thank you have three minutes good morning the board good morning everyone thank you for inviting us today I'm Excuse me ma'am if she has two devices on she should shut off one
of them and that would that's why we have a feedback in Echo she a phone and her computer on can you hear me well now yes thank you yes so I'm also a resident of the Chelsea
condomini um the building that you've seen on one of the slides on the north side of Tantra building and I and I'm here to express my opposition of having an outdoor rooftop on top of the building just on
top of our heads actually 10 ft way as previously has been mentioned from our bedrooms uh we are all concerned and definitely not pleased of having uh such an addition in the center of our
residential area thank you thank you um seen yes we have one more speaker uh Joseph hi Joseph do you swear the testimony you'll give in this preceding is the truth whole truth nothing but the
truth yes I do thank you yes well I'm I'm I'm also a resident of the building uh that's adjacent to the proposed Tantra uh club or hotel or restaurants and um I'm very concerned as my other two neighbors have mentioned
about certainly noise and Odor Control um a rooftop addition um I mean I I have no idea even how long no no one has mentioned how late they would be able to serve clients if there's a curfew uh you know cut off time um the Lagoon I
imagine is just for decorative purposes and not for you know bathing purposes but I just want to make that clarification because I see lots of water and um also you know the um mitigation of noise and also odor because these exhaust you know restaurant kitchen exhaust is very
invasive and and disturbing and it would be you know um encroaching Upon Our you know clean air if you will so um I'm just very concerned about U you know rooftop activity in the we hours of the night people trying to sleep um and also
where do you propose to store your you know your your refu your garbage and when would it be collected that we're going to have garbage trucks coming in at four o'clock in the morning to pick up bottles and you know rattle us out of our sleep so generally I just want to voice you know formally my opposition to
the rooftop uh bar Activity thank you thank you Joseph uh the next caller is Victor hi Victor do you swear the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth yes I do thank youone perfect thank you thank you for um for having me also thank you for the the presentation I am also one of the owner of a unit at Chelsea condominium I
personally love the fact that a small boutique hotel um could bring back to life you know this this beautiful space tentra but I'm also voting uh and and expressing strongly my opposition on the rooftop I'm actually working in the
hospitality business and I don't really understand at all uh what the rooftop of like 70 people could serve like a small boutique hotel of like five to seven rooms um assuming that each room will welcome probably two guest I
would say it's like a 12 to 14 people hotel and I don't really see the addition of a rooftop right in a neighborhood of like 70 plus guests partying making noise above um our neighborhood so again if it's just a
resting rooftop with two plans and a little loue chair great but I would really do not like to have a bar and some night activities in this neighborhood thank you very much
everyone thank you our next caller is is a phone number ending in 060 okay and can the caller can you please state your name and then I'll swear you in Reggie woodam Reggie Reggie woodam than thank
you sir do you swear that the test meal give in this proceeding is the truth whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you you have three minutes hi thank you for typing the call um I'm also a owner of the of a unit at
the Chelsea condominium which is north of Tantra um and I would like the W historical board to cons uh several things in the original part of the art deco era the 20s and the 30s rooftop
Terraces were not um prevalent at that time so to keep the historical building really to that era I would like you to to not allow this rooftop car us um the second reason is the quality of life for
the residents at the at the Chelsea the noise level will be a problem um I have lived there for approximately 30 years I was there during the Tantra era if you look at um have time to look at the um complaints of the noise level at canra
you can see historical complaints that were made due to noise levels so our bedrooms are approximately 10 ft away from this rooftop Terrace and I would just like them to actually really consider the quality of life that we're
going to have with this noise around us the trash is probably going to be in the alley which again is where the bedrooms face um on um the Chelsea Condominiums so uh again
it's there's no other things rooftop Terraces in this area because it's all residential and again the school next to it also so I would just like to oppose uh the rooftop terce and ask the board of the historical board to please
consider uh this this to oppose the um allly of the rooftop here thank you thank you I see no other uh speakers on Zoom is there anyone in Chambers wishing to speak I'm not getting a see just wanted to ask uh we could have a minute or two
for rebuttal when it's appropriate hi Matthew ganof with the Miami Design preservation League we have lamented the neglect of the building over the many years as is evidenced by walking around or viewing the photos in the
application the restoration and stewardship of the building is important it is currently not being maintained according to the strict standards of the city of Miami Beach we have reviewed the project and very much appreciate the proposal to restore and
renovate the property in particular reintroducing the original final around the corner however we have one main concern regarding the rooftop addition it does not appear to be sufficiently set
back from espanol away which has the potential of being visible and over overwhelming to the historic structure when viewed from the sight lines we recommend a modification to the proposed design to better comply with the sight line guidelines thank
you okay thank you I see no other uh members of the public wishing to comment so if the applicant would like to um respond to those comments you're you're welcome to thank you Mr chair uh just want to reiterate some things that we mentioned earlier that would
address some of the comments um from the public um one that uh given the aggregate uh Patron occupancy uh operation of the rooftop area would require planning board
approval and within the planning board's jurisdiction would be the all the operational issues um there was a question about um trash removal uh noise mitigation uh valet Etc all those operational items
will be addressed in the planning board application and we certainly have a substantial um discussion with the neighborhood about that um two that of course your professional staff has recommended approval and even based on
the just the design changes um it's the the some of the comments that were made there's an improvement such as Charles moving the door uh which actually one of the neighbors
appreciated uh that that would help mitigate um in addition our client Mr bahana is here just wanted to let him give you a brief explanation for how they Envision the operation uh of the
property thank you thank you for let me do I have to swear in have I sworn you in already or no no no okay uh can you raise your right hand do you swear the testimony will give us the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do thank you thank you um thank you for
having me um I'm going to be short um the idea of the sorry the idea of the rooftop uh was first and foremost um an an addition for the hotel room guest and like the person I've very cleverly uh
raised the capacity is between 50 to 70 people so the additional guest will be a like um so house very exclusive member only so we don't intend to create anything else than a cocktail atmosphere
uh around the sunset time that the reason why we withdraw the variance ID so the the pool is very minimal that's the reason why is adequate for 12 to 16 guests but then the sitting area is for
the cocktails uh hours and enjoying uh a site View and over see the Aesthetics of the venue we're trying to combine something very European very um Italian Riviera so that what the designer was
trying to create an environment where it was very comfortable and um visually uh enhancing by uh the waterfall and all those Lagoon so it's definitively not a poly Place uh it's definitively about uh
having enjoying a cocktail in a very uh visually enhan place thank you so much thank you very much um would one of the board members like to start us off with comments
right okay first off when we talked about the trellises um you still weren't totally clear with me my understanding is then there really is not anything up there to basically protect the people that are there from either rain or sun
correct it's pretty much open uh yes the the all the seating area is nearly 100% open except I think on the North End over one of the booths okay yeah and some of the trailers are structural to hold up the canopy which is a very thin canopy and some of it is
basically decorative no Landscaping is planned to be growing on them okay and uh one of the things with your hedge that you have up there from my standpoint I I feel comfortable that um that
meets what would be acceptable to me for being able to see from the street you know you you see a hedge you're blocking some of the sound and I think personally um that's um as good if not better than retracting four feet um and having just
a a railing of whatever so you know from my standpoint I think that I'm pretty satisfied with that okay great yeah and we have provided Landscaping plans so we you know we believe that the Hedge is really Hardy and thick but if if if
lands if forestry or Landscaping has another better suggestion of a hedging that's even that would mitigate sound we would be open to that as well thank you okay thank you well I heard from the residents of the Chelsea
condominium next door that they appreciate seeing the building being improved and taken care of and people who have a long memory when the tantro was there and and uh particularly th those Chelsea Condominiums those are the
triplets on 15th Street just very standout Art Deco buildings and and I'm very familiar and with with the neighborhood um I walk my dog around the the building and that area this morning and I'm wondering if one of the reasons
why we only heard from the Chelsea and other other people in the neighborhood there was no notice posted on the building that there was going to be a meeting today before the historic preservation board I hadn't seen it it certainly wasn't there today I think that the most important
issue in this meeting for this application is compatibility it's in a residential neighborhood adjacent to residential buildings across the street from a school and I would appreciate that the discussion should
have emphasized how are the residences going to be screened from sound and noise and odors and I don't think it's appropriate to have a valley drop off on a
residential street at night with cars lined up where people are walking to their homes from work and they're it's it's not appropriate there there's a there's a there's a valet drop off and pick up one for all the businesses on
Espanola Way it's on Drexel and Espanola Way and people who go to the businesses on Espanola they valet park there the cars are parked behind the school on 14th Place in the in the gym be behind the gym but but the the individual
businesses on Espanola don't have their own valet drop off and certainly I don't think it belongs on a residential street so I I think I greatly appreciate having somebody wanting to invest in the
building and bring a restaurant there something that's compatible with with the neighborhood and that was my concern about having drugs on top of the building without a drugstore I understand there's a historical context but I don't want there to be any
confusion hey let's go to the drugs club or that that that kids in the k through eight there they they know there's no drugstore there drugs it'll a joke kids kids going to Miami Beach High School down down that that street every day it's just out of context it doesn't have
any context and and and it doesn't belong in a residential neighborhood I think uh the the idea to put Tantra on there is great I think it will look good if the Tantra was even on the curved part below it and there was something
instead on the the pylon part that's that that would be just decorative like a some sort of floral piece a neon yeah so so certainly to draw attention but if but if the word Tantra doesn't fit there to put it around the curve would would be just as as visible I don't know that
we need to increase the height of the pylon um I I I sympathize with the people's comments from the Chelsea for their concerns about having any sort of roof activity there I'm not saying that I agree with
them maybe I do but I certainly think that in order that there there needs to be very clear how if there's going to be activation of that roof is how is how are they're going to be buffers and
screens so that their life will not be impacted in a negative way and so I don't I don't I'm not convinced that this this uh project is uh designed with the neighborhood and the neighbors
involved and I'd like to see some substantial modifications so um I made some notes Here I think Charles um I think you did a very good sensitive um approach have a
very good sensitive approach internally to to this project and and I I do have strong concerns about the noise um and addressing um the adjoining neighbors and I I've
been to the clay and throughout the building I I think it's a I think it's wonderful uh project but I've been on the roof and um I've had difficulty holding a conversation with the people I'm with
because of the noise level so I and the clay is not in that position as this project is adjacent to residential and so I really think there needs to be some approach and some
approach other than a a blank wall to um control noise I don't think that a TW foot planter which probably ends up being 18 inches wide is no more than than a pot that we put something in and
is not going to um help a plant get get very thick so I would tend to agree with staff's recommendation um for something WI lighter there whether it's 4 feet or not
I'm not sure Additionally the the design um I think everything is very you were again very sensitive to the original architecture of the building original language and then Here Comes This
rooftop trellis and um I'm one I don't see what it really relates to in the context and and and that's what I'm struggling with with how what what brought this on was it just some Whimsy thrown
down um and then one of the the people who called in raised the issue of this pool and and I hadn't thought of that and um this pool pond do people have access
to that it seems they do uh there seemed to be steps in there as if it was uh a place to lounge and and um and that that brings me more concerned for noise um so so my issues are the
compatibility to the surrounding neighbors and the uh the context of which that that trellis relates to and and noise uh thank you so much I'll Echo um the Sensitivity I think it's a beautiful
project and um I know this building well and look forward to it seeing coming back to life um my only concern really um and um if this could be I do want to see the project move forward so if this could be something that you could work out with staff I do think on the East
and North elevation there do there does need to be a differentiation between the historic and and the new structure whether color or some some sort of differentiation on the overall material because it it doesn't it reads as one building to me currently um and then my
only other concern which um some of the people brought up in mdpl as well was on A8 you are encroaching into the sight lines on the East Elevation and it's just it's just minimally so I think perhaps you would be able to adjust that
a little bit um in order to comply otherwise I think it's a beautiful project my understanding on the noise is that um since you had pulled the variance that there would be no activity after 8:00 p.m. so um I I really do
understand the neighbors's concerns um but it seems to me that at this point um there would be no activity there after that time period so thank you thank you for the presentation um I think there's a lot of nice components to this application particularly the uh
the exterior um just a couple of points for me um in terms of the design and the layout once you get to the second floor um I'm sorry for saying this but it makes me a little bit uh
queasy um the removal of these eight fireplaces I know they're in the rooms uh the design of the second floor doesn't really appear suddenly to celebrate our Deco and this is an art deco building I understand the jurisdiction of this board
but you know once you get to the second floor and then you get to the rooftop it doesn't really seem contextual um it almost feels like uh I'm sorry to say this I guess I have to be the blunt one because it's the way I feel but uh to remove these very benign
authentic features that have sat there for 83 years um you know there's no historic authenticity on the ground floor that's already established I mean there's very little in terms of flooring and material on the interior to be saved
and yet on the second floor there are these authentic features and to be very honest with you you know I I know that it's sort of a a gesture about donating the fireplaces and and quite frankly in my building I would love to have amazing fireplaces but the fact is that they're
authentic to this building and and they're beautiful and uh so so that's that's one thing um for me it's it's a problem and I realize we don't have jurisdiction but at the same time I feel like the new design should celebrate Art
Deco I don't think the interior designs feel like they celebrate Art Deco and I don't feel like the rooftop does either um I'm concerned about again you know I don't mean to be so so heavy-handed in my feelings it just seems like such a
little thing these eight beautiful benign little authentic features that uh individuals that visit our city would be able to appreciate and it just feels like they're being wiped away for nothing for no good reason um and I'm sorry if that sounds heavy-handed coming
from me um as far as the pylon goes I hear what everyone's saying in terms of uh drugs um I can appreciate too that it's uh contextual it's contextual to a
historic period in time um I don't really feel that that's the big thing that I would want to make a debate over I think it's nice that the pylon is being retained if it says nothing I think that's fine it could also have an art feature that's not a name at all I'm
actually quite concerned about setting a precedent of putting the names of new businesses on pylons because I'm afraid what that means when when the Essex House comes in and the Tiffany Hotel come in and they want to put their name there why not just because they didn't have drugs there originally I think it's
a a bad precedent for this board to to to create and therefore um I'd rather see just artwork a neon representation of nothing than actually a commercial sign I think um I I think that would be
a precedent um that that may not be good um I also lastly obviously is compatibility uh I think that's really important and this project is unique and that it is is very uh unlike others you
know in Washington Avenue and and more commercial areas it is very close to a residential district I believe with believe or agree with staff uh in setting back the rooftop features um I would also like to see a little bit to feel a little bit more
effort went into soundproofing um and and as you said Laura it's true I mean if at 8:00 everything stops but at the same time um people who live in AB budding properties may not necessarily work 9 to5 um they
may actually be sleeping during during those hours and I don't think that's fair to them so I feel like there could be a middle ground and could be a little bit more uh effort put into um ensuring that there's uh soundproofing as well as
addressing the the Seline concerns um but you know if there was a gesture and the part of maintaining a little bit more of the historical features uh it would get a lot more favor from me um you know the exterior I
think uh is nicely dumb but I I don't understand why we want a white wash um eight authentic features that are actually beautiful I don't I don't hear anyone saying they're ugly they're obtrusive they're small they're just there but they're authentic and so I I
struggle with that but I am excited to see new life brought in that those those features exist there because um because the building has been neglected for all this time it's been sort of like a time capsule there but but here they are
these great features and to me because the pylon being restored uh to celebrate that this building is being renovated and restored when those eight uh alluring features are being demolished that's hard for me to say I think that's
an overstatement I think the pylon is great but those eight fireplaces those hurt for me thank you thank you Kirk um I think it's an exciting project uh to um you know
reinvigorate this building give it new life um I think it's uh an interesting and you know I would argue an appropriate use for it um I think that the board generally in favor
of it um but there have been a number of things brought up that I think the board would probably want to see um adjusted um in in my notes and someone who wants to make a motion can can try for it but um you know the it sounds like there's
concern for the neighbors and ensuring that they're not going to be impacted by uh noise there are questions about the sight lines being impacted so you know maybe it's a slight reduction in in the rooftop um amenity um there's a question of of of
the sign what to do about the sign um but I'm generally in in favor for it so I'll leave it to one of the board members here to try to formulate uh an an appropriate motion um i' just like to ask Nick to make one clarification here I think that we as
the HPB are getting what our purview is mixed up with the planning board and I think that we only certain things that we are supposed to oversee and vote on here and I think some of the things that have been brought up are something that should be voted on by the planning board
and Nick could you make some clarifications sure Mr chairman I'd be I'd be happy to do that um as as the board May note there is a condition in the in the board order that the in the draft order that um that the applicant is required to obtain conditional use
approval for a neighborhood impact establishment um prior to the issuance of a building permit so this project will have to go before the planning board um for for forther proposed use um this board does not have jurisdiction
over use um and and and or conditions that directly address use um what what you can do is impose design related conditions um that you know that that may address some of the comments that
that that that you all have made or that you've heard from the public um but you you cannot directly regulate um the use of the property or condition the use of the property great thank you for that clarification I'm a little confused on
that didn't they have a variance um that they pulled for time so the so the that relate to operation the applicant withdrew um um their request for a variance for the hours of alcohol uh
sales for the for the outdoor bar um what you what you could do if um if you were looking to address uh use related you issues on the rooftop is things like um like orientation or
screening or um um you know any other physical modifications to the property but as far as the operation itself uh the business operation itself um that's outside of your jurisdiction so just for clarification when they want to they run their
business and then they want to stay open till 1212 a.m they're coming here or they're coming let let me let me clarify it is kind of confusing on that yeah um and I understand it is confusing um so this
board also acts in the capacity of the Zoning Board of adjustment which is separate in a part from your duties and responsibilities reviewing certificates of appropriateness completely separate criteria this board does have jurisdiction over the hours of operation
for an outdoor bar counter and and that is limited to that um we're not discussing that today because that that request has been withdrawn um so I think the confusion is then there's also the planning board
this particular property um with the currently proposed plan PL uh will require what's called a neighborhood impact establishment approval which is a conditional use conditional uses are in the sole jurisdiction of the city's
planning board and that is the board that will discuss the hours of operation in total not just for the rooftop bar but the entire facility um as well as this the sound levels levels of Music they often do require a sound study and
a peer review of that study stud they do a traffic assessment queuing of vehicles queuing of patrons um deliveries they set hours for for when deliveries can occur um they also look at trash operations in in how
that is occurring in order to reduce any impact on the the residential neighbors so the the outdoor bar counter variants would be much more limited than the jurisdiction the planning board has over the entire entire property because
the entire property would be governed by a a conditional use I hope that clarifies but I I understand it's somewhat nebulous so I'm I'm happy to answer any any additional questions you may
have I did ask when six months or a year when they come back to um extend their their hours on that rooftop the the hours and let me clarify too because I think we we heard some comments the hours are specific to the outdoor bar
counter okay if they wanted to extend those hours to midnight or later they would be required to come before you because that requires a variance however the planning board has a broader jurisdiction over all of the the entire property the planning board could limit
the use for the entire roof rooftop they could limit the hours for when the rooftop can be activated this board cannot all this board could decide on potentially in the future if requested is that the bar counter itself would be open past 8:00 P.M but
the rooftop operations in the hours of when people can be up there would be governed by the planning board so with the variance withdrawn the bar counter itself has to close at 8:00 p.m. that doesn't mean that the the
rooftop venue will also close at 8:00 p.m. they would just not be able to serve alcohol from that bar counter but the the overall rooftop operations are under the jurisdiction of the planning board would anybody care to formulate a
motion oh yes I move to continue I think that we've I I don't think we have to address each and every detail I think that we've we've all raised issues of compatibility and of uh preservation of historic elements I think that the uh
applicant and their their architect their representatives they've listened very carefully and I think that we should give them a chance to come back and uh see if our our concerns are addressed in the next preserv
presentation and maybe modific so I would only move to continue and I I would second that motion and and if I could just open uh for some questions from staff because I'm not 100% clear and my job after this meeting is over
would be to advise the applicant how to best make some modifications to the plans uh to bring back to this board um I I would appreciate I mean I think what was very clear was the the signage the
pylon I think that's very clear I think um Mr Pascal's desire to keep those fireplaces is not something that we could impose on the applicant however it is
something that we could discuss with the applicant and they could potentially profer that that condition but it I I caution you from imposing conditions relative to areas that are out of your jurisdiction because we do have an appeal process in
the city um that is heard by the special master and there has been some discussion at that level with regard to this this board's legal jurisdiction um so I heard um though that you know the sign I think was the
most specific direction we gave but it it seems like there was also um a comment that Lura made on the sight lines on the sight lines correct yeah the the sight line from the East um on the East
Elevation um sheet A8 and then also just the differentiation of from the second to third level on the East and North elevation I think that could use some some updating I think in Rel related to the to the sign which is when when I
first said it and and it was reiterated in a sense was I didn't think you need letters up there right um the the P Pon could be could be um done with with designs in the stucco reveals or what
have you and and lighting um and the and the signage could be on the the facade of the building in a in a discreet positive manner um I also had concerns about this Whimsical trellis how that
how that relates to um Art Deco in general um and then how the sensitivity to the surrounding areas can ask also just with regard to the sensitivity to the
community we have a hedge and we have a wire fencing but are there any other possible sound mitigation strategies that could be incorporated into the design there are um there are some sound
attenuating materials however what I would caution is we don't have a Sound Engineering study because that is what is is under the jurisdiction of the planning board that will be reviewed by by staff um likely a peer reviewer in
the planning board so there are I I wouldn't feel comfortable from a professional standpoint requiring certain sound mitigation materials without knowing a sound engineer's expert opinion on what would help and what what would not help it could be a
feel good thing that we could add into into the order but it may not actually help the neighbors so I think we can talk with the applicant um about that and about potentially a more generalized condition that this board could discuss
at the next meeting um if this is continued about you know more General sound attenuating material subject to you know a sound engineer's uh opinion and the planning board but one sound attenuating approach is space space um
solid walls and then there's special kind of high-tech materials that can be applied to to to walls that actually significantly absorb um noise what what I was referring to was um setback um
setting the bar back um from from that perimeter which was part of your recommendation yes Mr chair with I'd like to give just an example for for deor and for everybody here um one hotel and homes
back when it was uh the Gort the HPB approved the rooftop addition there no problem whatever and then uh the planning board came along and everybody was out like what we didn't even know this was going to happen you know and the planning board put in lots of
recommendations to the the Gort and they had each time the neighbors would come complain they'd come back they'd have to readjust the sound materials and whatever to the point now where the one hotel and homes has a great operation everybody's happy but it's really the
planning board that had to make all of those decisions and and the neighbors like oh wow we we didn't realize they were going to even put a pool up here you know so but historic preservation board has limitations and we have to remember that on what we are allowed to
to vote on versus what the planning board does and I think that probably helps clarify that vi de Mr chair would you allow the architect to just get some clarification on an item or two he just wanted to make some suggestions about things he could do um so I think Debbie
just compiled a list of items that she would be taking up with the architect do do you want to review that should we hear no I think I think that's pretty clear I mean the relatively minor adjustments that I think we can sit down and and go through sure but I would like to address the board on a series of
items that did come up at the end we've we've had a already an opportunity for some back and forth I think it's been very productive um and if it's okay for the sake of moving the meeting along we have a number of other items to get to I think that this is something that you'll be able to take up with the staff um I I
think we're probably do for a vote um and I can call do we need a date for the continuation yes we do and I would defer to the architect well I'll I'll need to sit down with staff so as soon as the
November 8th meeting we don't have much time between now and the the October meeting so I would recommend November 8th Stuart it's your motion right November 8th I just moved to continue it
doesn't whatever is convenient whatever works for the applicant is f however much time they need to make the changes and and present to us on the issues of compatibility I I'll call the role now Mr
Klein yes Mr Breslin yes Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Pascal yes Mr Reed yes Mr chair yes okay the application is continued thank you thank you to the applicant um it's I wish you well I think everybody's looking forward to a
to a good project all right Mr chair I think we we need to take up um Mr casden we're going to take one item out of order before you because we're going to lose a board member and we have one more application that requ far as a 57
vote um this is HPB 22527 1360 Collins Avenue an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the introduction um for the partial demolition renovation and restoration of the existing building including the
introduction of an active roof deck and new rooftop elevator and stair enclosures um this is a uh contributing building designed by Henry huser um in the Ocean Drive Collins Avenue local historic district
um staff commends the architect for proposing a significant restoration of all exterior elements um the applicant is requesting to introduce a rooftop pool and elevated deck as part of the conversion of the building back to its
original use as a hotel um in order to introduce the roof deck the applicant is is proposing to replace the roof structure um and introduce a new structure that will be able to accommodate the new uh structural load um staff would note that the elevated deck has been set back a minimum of 4
feet from the north and west facades greatly minimizing its visual impact from the street um the applicant is also requesting the extension of the existing East stairway an elevator so those are both existing they're asking to extend
those vertically approximately 14 ft um although the new stair and elevator enclosure is proposed to be set back 22 feet um it will still be visible from certain angles however because this is a um allowable height exception it's a it's a stair and elevator um it's not
technically considered a rooftop addition so there are no technical uh line of sight requirements but we just wanted to uh point that out that it will be minimally visible um again we're very excited about the restoration of this building um back to its original design
and we are supportive of the project with the conditions noted in our draft order thank you thank you Debbie good morning board Monica ensen with mhe law offic is at 7950 Northwest 53rd Street I'm also joined today by Jose Gomez of balen and
Gomez the architect of record um as Debbie indicated we're here today requesting a certificate of appropriateness for um partial Demolition and design in order to allow us to create a roof deck for the property as Debbie indicated this property was a Henry ho Houser from 1939
and it was originally designed with 50 hotel rooms it served as quarters for um the army during the war and then after that um saw some changes including again in 1989 where certain changes were made to the exterior of the building over
time the building changed its use from hotel I mean from a from hotel to apartment use losing more than half of the units it also saw the incorporation of a restaurant on the ground level that restaurant took over um the entire space and really we they lost the lobby of the
hotel there is no Lobby if you go in there so the client at this point is desirous of returning it to the original use of Hotel returning to the original configuration of the hotel rooms while we will not recover all of the original
hotel room numbers because we'd like to um provide for bathrooms and the upper levels for the rooftech and we'd also like to incorporate the lobby once again including um a storage for suitcases Etc we are we will be up there in about 46
rooms 47 rooms so we will be returning the use hopefully to a hotel with your approval of the new Renovations that we're proposing the the restaurant is a long-term tenant but they are desirous of seeing the lobby being reincorporated and being reused as a Lobby and entry
point for the hotel so we're proposing to redo the lobby um um and to have the restaurant on just one portion of the area we're also proposing to renovate the exterior of the building with all the cornes and the windows um and it's it's a larger renovation than it is a
new proposal but the proposal is to have a roof deck pool uh we're proposing to have it set back substantially the pool is a small amenity pool it's not a large pool and then along long cins we'd have just a small viewing deck nothing uh no
other services there we will be providing the elevator and staircase and again the bathrooms for the uh use will be on the lower level Jose Gomez is here to W walk you through the plans in a much more eloquent way than I
have good morning Jose Gomez Bellon Gomez Architects with the Architects a recer for the project um let's see if we can get the presentation going so here we go next uh this is the location I think you
all have seen in your package I just going to go through this very quickly next um this are the uh couple of uh images of the original building and a postcard uh from the 50s and these are
uh couple of images of the existing building as as it stands to today um actually the one in the bottom we uh we added the flag which is something that we want to put back uh next uh this is the uh again existing
elevations uh this is all uh to be renovated all the new windows are to be put back in the whole building will be restored next some of the details from the original building that we're planning to
uh uh restored and make sure that we uh bring back to to life some of them are deteriorated some are still in good conditions next this is the basement is an existing basement in the rear of the building a couple of rooms uh which we're going to
use as back of a house basis next uh the uh second uh I'm sorry the ground floor uh we'll show you the lobby area we're introducing a couple of uh rooms uh bathrooms in the in the front
uh for the restaurant and uh small office for uh the uh staff and on the south actually yeah on the South Side you see the uh the new uh kitchen the uh kitchen for the restaurant
next this is the restoration of the existing teraso uh is in Fairly good shape uh actually the building is in in pretty good shape uh and the toaso patterns that were uh original are still existing and we're going to be uh
renovating that next this is a typical level uh units are about 260 square fet uh an average next this is the third level you can see
the bathrooms adjacent to the uh Eastern uh stairs and the elevators and the bathrooms are just at Jon the public bathrooms I should say for the guests at the pool uh are there on the third level
next so this is uh the uh proposed deck uh we're racing it up uh about 3 4 feet uh 4 foot minimum because we want to get a a small pool about 3 and 1/2 ft through out sitting area all the way
around it the the pool deck has been set back at least 4T feet uh and it's going to have a glass rail all the way around the mechanical is going to be enclosed in the back actually enclosed by a um a u just to cover the uh the equipment is
be open to to the sky next and this is just a couple of images of uh what we're trying to do there's uh Ada AIS uh to the upper deck uh or from the upper deck to the lower deck where
bringing back the original uh flag pole and uh the only area that we're racing is where this St an elevator Tower the elevator Lobby there is a small elevator Lobby just to protect the elevator and give you a sense of arrival to the pool
deck next this is just another image from a different angle so you can see how everything is set back from the uh parit and General and we're going to be Landscaping the north uh section of the of the pool deck
next just an image from the pool deck uh glass rail is is being held very minimalist we're not trying to put too many things up there uh next the elevations restoring all the
origional elevation so the building next um here you can see some of the sideline study that we've done from across the street on on Collins and um the points where we're taking it from the plans and
you're seeing it in elevation we we're clearing the uh the tower next and this again it was prepared to study the sideline you can see from the uh North looking south on the building
uh small portion of the the tower uh might be visible there um and from the uh Collins Avenue how we set back the elevator on stair Tower so it's pretty much Clear only from maybe from some
angles you might be able to see it next and that concludes my presentation very straightforward thank you thank you Jose so we think that this renovation of the hotel rather than an addition is a a well preserved um part of the history of
Miami Beach the renovation and the addition of the pool deck will actually help to preserve the building even longer and I know that sounds kind of funny but the the reincorporation of a new roof um is going to require New Vertical um support systems and that
will also help to make sure that this building lasts even longer so with that we open ourselves up to any questions that the board may have and we seek your approval thank you for your presentation I invite you to take a seat while we gather some
questions for the board for you to address questions um it's it's a great proposal I I do appreciate it it's sort of sad to see what's currently residential going back to hotel when we have such a
critical housing shortage in Miami Beach um but it was originally a hotel you've done a great job in bringing it back I do question the fact that I think the smallest room is 206 square feet 26 I thought I saw something and there said two 206 was the smallest to be the
smallest yes and and to me that I don't know is that like a single room with a twin bed in it I mean I was really surprised to see that but I think it's a great plan I think you've done a you know and I like the fact you brought back the American flag uh so I I I I'm
in favor of the project in general thank you other questions for the applicant Barry I have a question it's maybe a drafting issue I I I don't know um will there be door and and we have no
authority over the interior spaces I guess but the um are there doors on these bathrooms so you no so the rooms there's no door in the in the in the
room to the bathroom right space saving um oh thank thank you for the presentation it's a beautiful restoration um I just had a question on the paint color on the exterior it seems like you're doing pretty almost like a a
federal historic tax credit almost in your um loyalty to the historic po postcard so just wanted to ask if that was under consideration as well to to update the exterior paint to the historic colors Kurt any questions mine's really
a benign question but it's regarding a very minor detail but I'm just curious um I know the uh existing Windows non original are being Place replaced with new casement windows I was
just curious to know what the Finish will be on the windows and what they were originally were they aluminum are they being replaced with aluminum I'm just curious to know that one of the requirements Kirk is that it' be a uh iodized aluminum or
silver I believe is one of them so that's what we are working with it it is in the order and that is what we're intending to do and I had just one last question to add to to the hempful which is regarding the the new glass railing it looks like it's going to be set back from the wall and practic ially you know out of view from the street so if you
could speak to that that would be great too so if you'd like to come back up and address those handful of things we can go on from there so I'll address uh Mr brin's question regarding room size so it is it is a small room it is one of the smaller rooms but we actually most of the rooms
are are substantially bigger than that but that is consistent with the original room size that was in the building um so laugh because the 260 square ft is the size of the rooms at The Mantel which a lot of people consider that sub subh housing but yeah we have people living
there fulltime so yeah so so it is it it is consistent with the historic nature of the building and the historic rooms we're actually trying to um do those configurations and that is one of the reasons for the open door concept is to have a a more open feel and have a flow
in the rooms so that they're not smaller it is actually a New Concept that we're seeing you know in a lot of uh boutiki hotels I know that I recently stayed somewhere in Orlando uh where it was kind of interesting because I had my daughter and my husband and no door um but it is a a modern uh it is a modern
way I think of of treating that which it is interesting but it is how it's done and it it does create an open feel it is designed in such a way where I I think you have the privacy but uh Jose can elaborate on that uh the paint color Laura we are working with staff to make sure that it is something that's
consistent with the historic we want to to make this as historic as possible and um Jose if you want to talk about the railings and the railings are all glass rails they all set back uh we try to do it as transparency as possible since we
raised the pedestal that's why we're we're just using simple glass rail as as transparent as we could be uh I don't know if I want to respond to various comment about the uh the doors uh that's
there that hotels that uh have that sort of design I'm happy with it I think I it it gives you a great open space uh I have it in my own home so I I stay
in aoft every once in a while if I uh and um they have a similar concept but there it still allows for some privacy but hey Mr chair we can open up the public hearing thank you very much you can uh yeah have a seat we'll hear from the
public now um before we open the public hearing are there any disclosures that the board members would like to make see none if there's anyone on Zoom who wishes to speak please raise your hand see none anyone in commission Chambers wishing to
comment I'm Matthew ganof again with Miami Design Pres a league want to thank the applicant for the presentation where they addressed our question about the restrooms on the upper deck our upper level we look forward to the restoration
and upgrading of this historic building we do have a few concerns though there not do not appear to be any limitations on how the rooftop can be used and also we want to make sure that the addition meets all the sight line requirements from all the uh streets around the area
thank thank you very much thank you anyone else seeing none you can close the public hearing so we'll move on to uh board comments well I had no questions and I just want to explain why because it just
sort of fits they're they're improving the building and it's in a neighborhood full of hotels it's adjacent to a bar and other commercial so the use of the the rooftop isn't a concern like the prior application because it is
compatible with the neighborhood so I I I do think that what they're proposing is a step up uh from what's there now for the building and for the neighborhood and I wish them very good luck ditto it's a perfect project
beautiful I don't really have any comments outside of I mean the uh the visibility of the elevator on the roof I just seems like there's not really anything that can be done to make it more uh unobtrusive I think it's good I
think uh I'm supportive of the project I'm happy to move it with the staff's recommendations okay do we have a second second we have a second let me call the role Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Klein Mr Brin yes Mr Reed yes Mr Pascal yes Mr chair
yes okay project is approved congratulations thank you staff and board have a great day okay Mr chair we're going to move on to uh the next application do we have Mr Rothstein uh yes I he just need a minute or two to come down let me let me reach
out to him okay um the next application on the agenda is HPB 22524 and HPB 22525 petitions have been filed by um by two separate applicants uh requesting a rehearing of the May 10th 2022 decision
of the historic preservation board wherein it approved a certificate of appropriateness for the partial Demolition and renovation of two buildings on the site the total toal demolition of two buildings the construction of two new additions and landscape and Hardscape modifications um there's also been a uh
motion to request the consolidation of P of the two petitions um if the request for rehearing is granted the original application may be heard by the board uh immediately um so just a little bit of background before we let the petitioners
present their their arguments um again this this was a project that was approved by this board on May 10th of this year um the code does provide for uh a provision that a affected party can file for
rehearing um that was done by two effective parties however the the code allows for only one petition for rehearing so those two petitions have been Consolidated into one rehearing
application um there are there are two standards for rehearing um the standard for petition for re-hearing the the petitioners must demonstrate the following one newly discovered evidence
which is likely to be relevant to the decision of the board or the board has overlooked or failed to consider something which renders its decision issued erroneous so those are the two standards that legally that have to be
met in order for this board to Grant the rehearing um we have uh the staff recommendation is included in your um in your agenda this morning and we will present after we hear from the petitioners that's right
and um and Debbie you and I can um Step Off the Das as we'll be appearing before the board and my colleague Steve rosin is is on his way and he'll be advising the board on this matter and and while Steve makes his way down the the petitioners can can go ahead and
get ready to present one quick housekeeping matter um both Mr um dyke dick as well as um I have separate present ation so we're Consolidated uh I don't think I will
take the 10 minutes that's normally awarded so um but Mr Dickman's going to be going first and then I will follow him in his presentation but I think under the rule the normal rules we usually go forward at 10 minutes per
presentation and that has been the format in the past so we'd ask that this board recognize that and correct so so we'll set the timer at at 10 10 minutes uh correct that's correct as to each
each of us so he will go first and I will go second do you uh first of all do you have the full board do you have the board for a quorum I guess you have four members yeah okay great can we have a determination as to Mr rosin can we have
a determination as the number of votes required in order to uh Grant rehearing sure at this point uh under 16 I'm sorry 118 106 of the city code Quorum in voting we need to have four board members present to have a quorum which
we have now it would be a majority of those board members that are here so it would have to be three out of the four votes three out of four votes majority present the majority of the present yeah there's actually five board members present oh there were five there's one
in the restroom yes oh okay thank you I I apologize I only counted four so did I you know more about the space than I do gotcha all right whenever you're
ready you proceed sit down great thank you uh good morning uh members of the board uh my name is Andrew Dickman the Dickman Law Firm I represent the saai resort and residence condominium uh they are located on uh
20th Street uh directly across from this project the subject prop project uh they're within 375 ft of uh the project therefore they are automatically deemed affected persons under your code
1189 A2 B3 little I so as an affected party we have a right to file the petition this is an opportunity for you to correct your decision on May 10th 2022 when you
literally uh hacked off a section of the building the main building uh that was uh In Contention at the time there were two things that had Arisen during that hearing that uh were flas points one was
20th Street and how it was going to be operated and whether it could operate uh efficiently and the north elevation of the building many of you express concerns about that the
uh the decision that was made at that hearing and why we're here today was that there were thousands of square feet of that Tower was dramatically moved uh from that building and it was moved East uh away from uh the beach uh
via uh what was called a straw votee and with zero understanding of what that would do to the site plan the elevations any Shadow studies it would cast the impacts on 20th the Landscaping
traffic studies so in essence we're here because you had an obligation to not just make a wholesale change on that project of that magnitude and call it a condition and you were I
think you were misled by your assistant City attorney when he said to you you can make you had wide discretion to make reasonable uh conditions reasonable safeguards and conditions that's not a reasonable Safeguard in conditions in
fact you are public officers and you have an oath to uphold the charter and the code of this city and that means that you have to make sure that the application is complete the application that you are reviewing is complete and that you fully understand how that is
going to affect uh the area and dealing with the criteria you improperly made a major substantial redesign of the tower into conditions and what they call conditions you can't
make every redesign a condition four of you were on the right track and should have stopped the vote continued a hearing and required the developer to resubmit plans very much
like what you did with uh 1445 the prior one where you had concerns you wanted it to come back and make sure do your duty that you could understand everything that you were voting on let me if you haven't looked at the video and if you haven't read the transcripts that we
have submitted into the record and I hope you have because it really gives you a a a a a capsule of what transpired let me give you a few quotes board member
Reed you stated it looked really big seems massive we haven't seen a shade study can't the street meaning 20th Street handle can the street handle all these uses I would like to see
revised plans better to defer member Klein not comfortable with the north elevation don't want to don't want a concrete Canyon on 20th Street I'm trying to understand what was proposed and that was after a proposal came
forward I'm trying to grasp what that 900 square foot per plate means and that goes to the floor plates that were reduced Miss uh member Weinstein I am also a little hung up on compatibility with the environment
with the 20 ft how will it extend beyond the Cromwell on the east side that means changing the 20 ft to the east for me again it is compatibility Remember Pascal the one
thing I have to say my one concern is the massing and yes the footprint is super long in terms of compatibility I feel like it's a bit too big at that
point astutely chair Lopez said I think I hear four members mentioned massing or length may we take a straw poll so he alerted everyone that four members four of you had concerns big concerns about a
serious part of the project attorney cden for the developer immediately got up States I'm authorized to make a proposed modification that's when chaos ensued that's where things went wrong and if
you watched it and if you read the transcripts there were people huddling up here there were people asking questions about numbers there were all kinds of questions being asked and then of course there was a question then of course you know we we came up I objected
to it so did the the Miami Design preservation League objected to the fact that this was going forward in such a man manner when it should have been continued and and brought back so that you could see what you were voting on uh the City attorney app that you're
allowed to do reasonable and uh conditions and safeguards and Miss uh thit said I can confirm to you that I believe uh I can I can confirm that I believe your direction is quote crystal
clear so she understood everything but that's not the point the point point is the board has to understand it you have a solemn duty to understand what you're voting on you cannot ignore your own City's
legislation quote a city is based the city is bound by the procedural requirements imposed by its City Charter and its ordinances Gulf and East development corporations vers City of Fort Lauderdale it's Florida Supreme
Court 354 Southern 2 57 Mr attorney I can have it sent to you if you like uh quasi judicial boards do not have the power to ignore invalidate or declare unenforceable the legislated criteria they utilize in making their quas
judicial determinations this is Verizon Wireless versus uh Sanctuary uh golf at wolp quoting uh the omn famous omnio case what these means that you have strict
compliance requirements when you have codes that say this is the criteria and this is what your applications have to have in them site plans elevations etc etc in order for you to take those
packets home and make thorough studies of them so that you can come back here and ask important questions and four of you did four of you were like hey wait a minute I'm concerned about this and then all of a sudden it turned into let's just hack off 20 feet 30 feet whatever
it is and do all this and then let's do a straw po pole whatever that is that's nothing you know that was a tool to to sort of like get everybody off track and to misdirect and confus and OB obus
gate no one here knows what the project is going to look like our office called the city they don't have the plans they don't know what was voted on they just they just have the numbers do you have the do you have the plans we called yesterday nobody knows you don't know I
haven't seen them nobody knows what was voted on my clients have no idea what to do whether they want to go forward with an appeal or not an appeal because they have no opportunity to see the final design the re the big redesign which was
like taking off a lot of this building and put delegating so much uh authority to staff to to look at 20th Street and to review the plans when you look at the
actual order that was rendered it specifically says that it is not consistent with sea level rise and and resiliency it is not consistency with criteria there is not consistent with
criteria a a and F several criteria but the project would be consistent if and in all of these conditions including the first eight levels of the new tower Edition shall be reduced in length by 30 feet from the east in a manner to be
reviewed and approved by staff consistent with the certificate of appropriate this please turn that off thank you it's time I I want to be fair to to everyone concerned well there's only us being the petitioners here so I
have right but it's 10 10 minutes each I I just again I want to keep it fair across the board let me finish please if you don't mind I have a right I we filed this I'll give I'll give two minutes of my time to Mr the maximum floor plate size portion of the new tower Edition that exceeds 50
ft in height shall be 15,000 square ft per floor in accordance with Section blah blah blah blah blah those conditions should not be conditions those should have been wait a minute you guys okay great idea thank you for
bringing that proposal to us the public trust is at at play here the neighbors who are affected need to see that please bring it back we'll continue it please bring it back for a vote on it what you need to do here to today and I'm
imploring to the four of you who were really on the right track is to do that today Grant this petition because what you have Mis what you have not uh what you have misunderstood is that you have to follow
the criteria that staff misled you and said you can make these conditions no you need to make sure that that application is complete that is why we're here for a rehearing I'll Reserve time for rebuttal but again
that is what you should do here today is Grant a petition four of you who were concerned can order that have them bring the plans back here it everything might be fine but everybody has a right to know what was approved the only thing we know is what was in that order nobody
has seen a plan a reserve time thank you thank you m Mr Robinson hi can Harrison Robbins um I represent a number of unit
owners including saai 1808 LLC satai 2204 satai 2304 and Dr Steven sway who is the president of the saai um you know we adopt the argument of the
association that was just made here we adopt their petition however we file the separate petition I just want to note that in May this project was approved and as of this date I have yet to see a revised set of plans we requested them and they have
not produced it why are they not presenting that today why didn't they not provide that as part of their presentation before this hearing why are they holding that back if it's clear and it met your requirements it should be there but they
did not the lack of it says a lot let's let's go quickly to my presentation um would you please put thank you uh next slide we we're going to be talking about
20 20th Street loading shortly next slide a total of three loading spaces are required pursuing to the Miami Beach code section 130-11 next page this is the calculation straight out of
the code because the new the new tower calculations it exceeds for 75 residential units there's a requirement to two loading spaces and for 2,959 Ft of restaurant there is one
space required so a total of three spaces the plans provide for only two spaces and even that's questionable because it's tandem loading spaces I don't see how you can load and unad load a truck in a tandem space but only two
spaces are provided with a tandem space that is that was approved so it's not in compliance with the basic loading code and we know how problematic 20th Street is so all that load is going to be forced to the street Miami Beach code 13- 103 defines loading space
requirements for pickup and delivery and it says in there that all loading spaces are to be scaled next page I'm sorry next page says that all deliveries shall be
scaled and all trucks shall be scaled to delivery vehicles expected to be used it says not less than 10 x 20 ft but the criteria is scaled to delivery vehicles expected to be used go to the next page which is the shore club's traffic
assessment report next page we go to page five of the kimley horn report it says it's highlighted here s u40 design Vehicles will be used for deliveries and loading activities next
page and Su 40 is a length of 39.5 ft 8 ft wide next page this a 20th Street single loading area maneuverability study that was provided at the presentation by the
applicant based on a s Su 40 truck next page shows how the one truck would be able to come in to that space it also shows how it's going even that one truck going in there and even if you double load it it's still going to go over
those curbs it certainly doesn't have room for three trucks in there as required under the code now let's go to the staff report next line okay the staff report says that
this proposal loading area meets the minimum required loading space dimensions 10 by 20 ft but that is not the criteria for this particular project that's the minimum permitted however as it says and we read
in the code very clearly that you were supposed to consider what is going to actually be used and I quoted that section of the code previously and what's proposed to be used is su4 which is 39.5 ft by 8 ft that will not work in
this loading space yet you need that space so this is a mistake this is a fact that overlooked and we need to correct it we need to make certain that there are three loading spaces on the site on site
there is a right to wave that requirement and let's go to the next page please under 130-11 D there is a waiver provision but you did not wave it let's go to the next page
130-11 space requirement says for property properties located within a locally designated historic district or Historic Site the historic preservation board May wave the requirements for off Street loading spaces for properties
containing a contributing structure provided that a detailed plan delineating on Street loading is approved by the parking Department no on Street loading plan was was presented by the parking department and this board
did not wave that requirement next line next page next page there's another problem that was overlooked next page the shore club's traffic assessment relied upon an incorrect restaurant seating data next
page this is directly from the zoning data sheet from the applicant and it shows the quality restaurants a total of in the Cromwell building and the new residential building a total of 444
seats and then there's a separate bar area 57 seats in the Cromwell and 74 seats for a total of 131 seats so what happened see that 4 444 seats and the separate 131 seats in
these traffic assessments it only evaluates for 304 seats so it undercounts the capacity needed for this 20th Street and the amount of traffic that's going to be utilized on 20th Street and on Collins Avenue in fact
it's short 140 seats now the staff report says no we're miscounting it in fact it's only 304 seats because 140 seats are counted by square footage because they're drinking areas and
drinking areas you do it by square footage but look at this there's 44 seats of quality restaurant that is not drinking yet the assessment report shows only 304 seats so it undercounts what is
going to be needed in order to serve the the the building and the amount of traffic that's going to impact the building and going to impact my clients adversely so so these are two funded the loading space is
problematic and the and the traffic load is problematic here and we brought that to your attention remember Martin kazera described all the problems we have in 20th Street it's existential if that street fails it causes a failure
of access to both buildings both the saai and the Shore Club so we need to go back there and look at that we need to reassess this project and make make certain we have adequate loading space and that a prop proper traffic assessment is performed in order to
assure that it adequately handles the capability may I have one more minute please one more minute thank you so the last last issue I raised was at the before at the hearing and before the hearing I filed a motion and request and
objection that the uh applicant at the very last minute submitted a whole set of plans concerning view analysis and view corridor analysis and that was submitted on a Friday which did not give either staff a chance to evaluate it in
their report nor the affected parties to evaluate it and have an expert look at it for impact so this information was dropped on you and we requested you not to review that information and not consider that information because it was not
timely provided and I moved to strike it and and unfortunately you were not given the guidance to rule on that but we need a ruling on that issue whether or not that was properly before this board we're saying it did not comply with the rules
did not timely provide those documents and dropped it on us the last minute and really did not give an opportunity for this board to evaluate those situations so Mr Robbins based on that I asked for rehearing thank you thank you
now we'll hear from Steph please good morning still morning for a few minutes uh Mr Vice chairman and members of the board um Nick cerges here before you on behalf of the planning department um for
the reasons we've laid out in staff's response and and for the reasons we'll go through today the petitioners have failed to meet their burden under the city code for the grand of a re-hearing um and for that reason we respectfully
request that the board declin to disturb its decision of just four months ago and and deny the petitions for rehearing um I'd first like to respond to a point raised by uh Council for the saai
association um just just to to make sure the record is clear the board did not impose the conditions relating to the size of the of the building that specifically the length of the Tower and the size of the floor plates by straw
vote the board during its deliberation as you are entitled to do and as you do uh routinely on on matters where um where you're trying to build consensus the board can take a straw vote on on whether certain conditions might be
acceptable but that's not how that decision was made here the board's final motion did in fact include uh the conditions relating to reducing the length of the Tower and reducing the uh maximum size of the of the floor plates
and those conditions are memorialized um in the board's order um regardless the association's argument is outside the scope of a of of of a petition for rehearing and and and that that goes for the for the arguments raised by the by
the individual owners um uh as well um on a petition for rehearing you can only look at whether the petitioners have pointed to newly discovered evidence which is likely to be relevant to the board's decision or that the board has
overlooked or failed to consider something which rendered its decision erroneous and and what the petitioners um are are what the petitioners have done here is is really try to shoehorn arguments that that are probably more appropriate for appeal into into this
proceeding which which is a petition for rehearing and which can only be granted if you find either again newly discovered evidence or that the board failed to consider or Overlook something which rendered your decision um erroneous and and because the
petitioners have have failed to meet that burden um both petitions should be denied um and I'll turn it over now to to to Debbie for uh for staff's response um thank you Nick uh more specifically
with regard to the argument regarding the um the loading requirements and the parking Department's responsibility to approve an off Street loading loading uh plan if the an on Street loading plan
excuse me if the um the board grants a waiver um close examination of the plans that were submitted and presented to the board uh reveal that there is a loading area on sheet a 2.31 uh this area is sufficiently size
to accommodate all loading um as Mr Robbins had pointed out in our staff reports we do um outline the minimum loading requirements which is 10 by 20 per loading space uh the transcript of the proceedings including the testimony
by the applicant's traffic engineer um and the petitioners clearly demonstrate that the board properly was informed of all loading operations um and was aware of the petitioner's concerns regarding the
loading in fact um the only incorrect information the board received during the hearing was a statement from Mr Robbins who undercounted the loading and stated there were two loading spaces required all of the information that was provided by the applicant's traffic
engineer was accurate it in the plans uh submitted uh clearly identify a a size sufficient to accommodate all required onsite loading therefore
a on Street loading uh waiver is not required for this project therefore there is no requirement that the parking Department shall approve an on Street loading plan prior to the issuance of a building permit um further uh specifically to
address the Traffic Engineers assessment for the Project's trip generation the um the applicant pointed out the zoning data sheet the zoning data sheet delineates outdoor dining indoor dining
it does not delineate um the specific requirements in the and I'm going to need to look at this in the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip gener ation manual 10th edition those are very specific
categories for trip generation which include quality restaurant and drinking establishment our zoning does not specify what category a seat for dining is so the trip generation that the engineers calculated was correct based
on the very specific categories in that traffic uh Engineers manual so there is no new information there and the board was proper informed um with regard to the uh Transportation uh
plan so staff does not believe that either of those wen't um a a rehearing because they do not satisfy the standard of review um lastly the the um other than what Nick had mentioned regarding the uh
basis for appeal versus rehearing um the applicant is stating that because the board did not rule on the um petitioner request to strike a particular portion uh of sight line studies view quarters
that were submitted by the applicant the board is not required and is under no obligation to rule on a member of the Public's motion so that does not constitute new information and that that is not something that the board overlooked the board was well aware of
the um the petitioner motion to strike and with that I I again just to reiterate what Nick said we do not believe that the petition uh establishes either one of the criteria required by this board to Grant the re-hearing and
we are asking that the rehearing be denied thank you thank you Mr lurin yes Mr chair chman how are you good how you doing good morning to all board members Michael Lin tuner South bisc Boulevard here representing the Shore Club with me today's Alice
witkoff and my co-counsel nan casden the city code contains the standard for the grant of a motion for rehearing it's exceedingly narrow it was borrowed from the common law it's two prongs the first prong is whether newly discovered evidence which is likely
relevant to the decision of the board would have changed your mind the second prong is the board has overlooked or failed to consider something which renders the decision issued erroneous as a matter of law the petitioners have not met their burden and this motion should be
denied with regard to newly discovered evidence a good example of that would be the chipperfield tower let's say that it was overlooked that maybe the base was actually a part of the Shore Club original design and you all found that out after the hearing of course that's
not true the chipperfield Tower was designed and built in the late 1990s so there's been no newly discovered evidence profer to you all today so they fail on that prong the second prong is something that you you all overlooked as
a board for example if you all approved a tower at a height of 300 feet well you all simply know that in this particular area in the rm3 zone it's 200 feet as a height that would have been something that you all would have overlooked they have not presented any evidence you all
today to suggest that this prong is satisfied so under either of these two prongs their arguments fail and the motion should be denied the petitioners base their entire argument on alleged errors of your decision and non-existent procedural defects that they cannot be considered
on rehearing the first claim is the number of loading spaces the council to pisher says that we only have two loading spaces that's incorrect we have three loading spaces they happen to overlook the one in the basement their second claim is based upon the first claim
they claim that since we didn't have three spaces we must seek some type of waiver from you all well that claim fails because the first claim fails we have three spaces we don't need to seek a waiver from you all or anything from the parking Department with regard to traffic as a legal matter the board
cannot consider lay person teson as much as I like to think I'm an expert on many different topics I'm not an expert on traffic I am not a transportation engineer that matters deserve for experts such as the impact of development ment on traffic the petitioners could have tried to hire a
traffic engineer to opine that the traffic state was erroneous they failed to do so we should not be burdened by that wrongful decision the city's professional transportation department reviewed and approved the traffic stud finding no error this is because there are no errors with the traffic study
Adrien debowski from kimy horn is here to answer questions regarding the traffic analysis for this project I am not competent to tell you the traffic study has no errors but Adrien or the city's trans portation Department staff are qualified experts in the subject matter and it is particularly ironic
that they continue to bring up congestion on 20th Street when they are the sole cause of any congestion on 20th Street I rode my electric bike there last night just a double check to see if there are any improvements upon 20th Street I saw the ubiquitous black SUV
parked on the south side of the street still in the public right away directly underneath a sign that says no parking I also looked and saw the private drive that there SP to use for their unloading and loading activities yes they've cleaned it up since I brought that up to you in May but if you look right at the
private Drive there's still a giant white refrigerator and it's padlocked so the private Drive cannot be used for its intention which is to unload and load trucks within that private Drive instead they do it on 20th Street or even worse they will back they will drive into the
private drive and then back out into 20th Street which is even more dangerous for pedestrians and cars Miss Mr Dickman's testimony focused upon procedural defects as I tried to point out to you at the beginning of my presentation procedural defects are not
within the proper scope of a motion for rehearing if Mr dickin wants to assert that claim he can properly do so by filing an appeal to the city special master and then on to the C Court of Appel Division and then on to the Third District Court of Appeal but it is not a claim properly before you all with a
motion for rehearing vehicle in conclusion it seems to me that the saai simply does not like to have its neighbors improve their respective properties with the bulgary hotel they've been fighting the bulgary for a year and a half now almost the
building permit's almost about to issue for the buer hotel so they have lost that fight with regard to the Shore Club we are pushing forward as quickly as possible we have already selected Auer Resorts as our hotel operator you all might know them they're worldwide known Hospitality chain they have a famous One
in Napa Valley in Northern H called AU de Sol so we are moving forward quickly this delay litigation is bereft of any Merit and you all should properly deny this motion for rehearing I'm happy to answer any questions you all might have and I really appreciate your time thank
you thank you let me know when it's time for rebuttal please okay sure sure go ahead thank you we don't open this up to public hearing correct this is not a public hearing for the purposes of the motion for rehearing
okay okay let me just make this very quickly um do any of you have any idea what you approved uh on that date when basically you took a building and you did that you
did that you sliced off part of it no one here has an idea about that and the second prong of our petition the the requirement for petitions have you overlooked or failed to consider something which renders the
order erroneous you're required to have a complete site plan and materials containing detailed data to be able to know what's going on so if you Chang the building not only from the elevation but
the site plan what is that going to affect does that give you detailed data I just ask all of you like do you have any idea nobody here does there are no plans it's so ironic that you approved a massive
building a Redevelopment Project without plans without plans no plans whatsoever do any of you know what you approved that's an error I'll leave it at
that there's a statement by Mr Laren that there were loading spaces in the basement the basement cannot handle a common sense a basement cannot handle an Su 40 going down it and there is no
traffic maneuverability study showing that there could be a loading space downstairs in the basement it says very clearly in assessment report that Su 40s what were going to be used for deliveries and there was two spaces purportedly
upstairs as tandem loading which doesn't even make sense because how you load and unload with trucks are back to back and for them to say oh we found the third space downstairs in the basement that's something that's not
credible because Su 40 was not shown to go down there moreover what's argued by Mr Lin is quite different what was audited by by staff which said there was more than adequate space for for 10 by 20 trucks within the area we need to
deal with a loading issue the last time we appealed the Shore Club it was surely on the issue of inadequate loading spaces and based on that alone my client said we cannot let this hotel open up without having adequate loading on site
when they can put it on the site and here they originally proposed a double double entry for loading spaces and they took that away and reduced it to a single entry for loading spaces and put the tandem we need loading there yes saai
puts a load on 20th Street but they're there now they've been approved and when the shore cut was operating and everybody was making demands on that street it was a disaster we need to anticipate impacts and we need to correct oversights that
occurred this was not overlooked this problem was overlooked it needs to be solved it can be easily solved on paper we don't want to have to change concrete let's do the correction of the paperwork thank you thank you all um do we uh have a
board deliberation any comments have questions sure and I have a a question for staff um about the size of the vehicles that um that need to be
accommodated on the site the Su 40 is is if do I recall correct that they're 392 ft long up to okay now I didn't I did not review the whole transcripts but was there a discussion at our meeting at all
about the fact that they would be su4 truck and whether or not 10 by 20 sites would accommodate the S40 trucks is that reflected in the transcripts it's it's staffs um Bel that the the property can accommodate all of the required loading
the traffic analysis was included and as part of the record of the original approval so yes the board members had all of that information that is not new information um that was the loading was discussed at length um I believe at both
hearings remember this this was heard by the board at length and on two occasions um and so yes it's my opinion that the board was well aware and the record reflects that that the board was aware of the loading requirements um and the the plans that
were presented showed the the loading spaces were able to be accommodated no because I don't recall ever hearing about an su4 truck before my question that was included in the for the original approval can can someone show
me where that's in the record because the the petitioner is asserting that we never considered that before and it doesn't sound familiar to me so as far as whether the staff believes I can I can guarantee you that
is in the record it is it is within the report um I think it was kimley horn let me see do we it's part of the record it's I'm me get the date of the report that was
submitted um it was in April 14th 2022 kimley horn traffic assessment report that was part of the record and part of the materials the board reviewed which had all of that
information that that had said that a 10 x 20 spot is it sufficient for an su4 vehicle that staff was pointing out the minimum code code requirements if they were not able to provide the minimum code requirements in the project then they would be requesting the waiver they
are more than able to accommodate their loading needs on site and they do not need the waiver which is why it was not improper that they did not request the waiver have any so the answer is yes it is it's in the record but we can't can can we
see it I mean just telling me it's in there I don't have like a photographic memory I can remember submitted as an exhibit in their in the rehearing petition in we're at hearing I'd like to see it do you do you have the materials that I I don't have it up so I can put
it on the screen it's okay but you don't have it it was submitted as M Mr Reed um in exhibit B to this uh to this file which which was provided to all board
members um if you turn to page five of the kimley horn study um there are a number of references to su4 design Vehicles being used for deliveries um and and loading activities for purposes of of the of the
traffic analysis yeah Mike and and it's also addressed in attachment G1 G1 may I respond to that question any other board comments or questions at this point may I respond I I would just like
to make the comment you know that I live in the neighborhood I'm well aware of all the projects that have been talked about with the Shore Club since the 90s um and if you all remember how thick the packets we got for the Shore Club
project for the two times that came before us bigger thicker than any other project fully detailed um and uh and when we made our first comments they went back and they listened to us they came came back to us they have been on top of the game from
the very beginning and I might remind this board that that the Siti has been against every project in the cins Park neighborhood since it began and they are the Goliath in the neighborhood I have to object to that we didn't I'm not
attacking the Shore Club and that's not fair I'm I'm here as an attorney repres have you not have you not been against every project let's let's keep this let's keep this open to to we with comments can control your board member that would be very nice thank you
thank you that is very unprofessional unprofessional okay if everyone could please take a seat and and we'll leave it open to to board deliberation at this point please yeah I'd like to focus on the issues and not on
personalities uh any other board comments questions Laura very okay um I mean I I I will say for my part um I mean this wasn't that long ago I
remember the deliberations I know I came in with my own concerns and questions and uh from my own perspective I felt like uh it was a very vigorous engaged interaction with my fellow board members
and um from my own perspective I felt like we reached consensus I know that I responded to the comments of my fellow board members and uh I think from my own perspective I I compromised and and felt
happy with the outcome that it was uh reflected the consensus of the expertise and insights that all of you bring so um if there are any other comments or questions the floor is open otherwise I open it to to a motion if anyone wants to make a
motion when like there to be board deliberation first we just ask questions please okay well back to the issue that was I already asked about where in
the does the transcripts or the record reflect that we considered the size of the vehicles and we were told yes it does then we were told exhibit B which my colleague is looking through right now and we haven't found anything that says shows refers to su4 the size of the
vehicle so that in of itself to me is reflects that there was something that we failed to consider even if it was in there and we didn't consider it if we approved loading spots that were 10 by 20 without considering
that the vehicles that would service the the uh the loading and unloading by code are required to the spots have to accommodate the size of the vehicles not the minimum spots but so I think that that reflects that we fail to
consider um something that's that's relevant we didn't consider the size of the vehicles and the fact that one of the three spots that we're saying is required now is is an underground and and that's going to accommodate the su4 so I think that's a
reason under the the criteria showing that we overlooked the failed to consider something that was relevant and and whether or not there's adequate parking on this site I mean not parking loading and unloading is very
important considering they're adjacent to a residential building and then the other thing that we overlooked or failed to consider I agree that while we frequently operate as a board where we will approve with
conditions change the height of landscaping or change the material of something but as far as chopping off part of a building and we haven't even seen seen the plans for for what it would look like and and and what kind of
changes would have to be that's that's something that I think needs to be before the board we can't delegate and give off our responsibility to staff otherwise why are we even we we could let the staff to decide anyway we're
we're supposed to review plans and the plans were not complete if what's ultimately approved is a building that has a different size and shape and there aren't even any plans yet so we certainly overlooked or failed to
consider the final plans for this building because they aren't even finalized yet so I think it's it's a bad practice for us to delegate and like like the part of the code I remember it
came be before us once about the waiver of the the parking it says it has to be approved by the parking department and so that was a condition that the parking department will have to approve this and so we approve but it's clear that we can't approve something without the
parking Department's approval so it's sort of like saying okay we approve it even though the code says we can't approve it without the and and and so this is a tangential issue but but I that that my point is to to give over to
staff to handle things that we're supposed to consider here and there's supposed to be an opportunity for the public in advance to review the plans and com and com com and comment on them that's due process
that you have you know what's going to be coming before us and you have an opportunity to comment on it and so changing plans of of what the building's going to how big it's going to be and the sh yeah that's that we we
didn't consider the final plans and and so I I think that we we're entitled to a rehearing that would be include those final plans I'm not saying how how we should vote maybe we're going to vote the same way but but
certainly to to to fairly consider everything us and the public and to do what the code requires of us we need to have the plans before us Ray we we often allow staff to finish
we we we we vote on something we say are we going to continue it or are we going to accept it and we voted we accepted the plan and and we said we'll let staff continue it from there I don't know why all of a sudden now we're looking at it differently but I would like to make the
motion that we deny this rehearing Barry well um um I had some comments this is not in reference to your motion um because I want to do the right thing and I'm not an attorney and I
don't want to put the the project the city everybody at Jeopardy um I feel we did the right thing um um but I'm not ready to make a motion because I'm afraid of the consequences
of a motion such such as what was just proferred um I think that um I've understood when it comes to parking and loading that the parking
Department um reviews our decisions no the staff is shaking their head no that um yeah please yeah if you could because that's been my assumption so just to clarify the
parking department will only review if an applicant is looking to have their loading in a city parking space Oh if the parking is on private property the parking department does not review the transportation department reviews the
maneuverability um in and out of of the site and they did that for this application the transportation I think that we did I I think that we made the right decision at the end of that meeting with um altering the massing on
the building uh it was very clear to me what we were doing um I don't recall who made the motion or not but um it was very clear that we were stepping the building back I'm a little surprised
that there aren't drawings by this point um to that effect but um I don't know the motion from a legal standpoint to protect the process of what of what we did I have a question does an appeal
come back here to this board or it goes to another no an appeal would go to the city special magistrate that is your appell that's the first tier of review right now only before you is whether to rehear this matter it's not supposed to be to reargue what was already
previously argued before the board and we could rehear this at a future date if we need if we want that is correct if there is if there is a motion to rehear and it and it's seconded and it passes then you will determine whether excuse
me rehear it today or set it for future time because it would be open to public comment and have the prop noticing requirements there's already a motion on the floor is there a second I would like to respond to to to
to what steuart said because um with regard to discussing and deliberating about the massing of a building we do it all the time and it's my understanding um through the city attorney that this board has
jurisdiction whether to request changes and to leave them subject to staff approval or to require that they come back to this board with the plans drawn and leave it up to the board's jurisdiction and it's always been my
understanding that that's the board's right to do and as I recall in this particular instance the board opted to request changes in massing and opted to leave the final review uh subject to St
approval so to me that doesn't represent overlooked evidence or new evidence and and I hear what you're saying steuart I mean and sometimes you know sometimes it's iffy you're sort of um but but at the same time you know I think we decide
if as a board if if we're putting our confidence in staff and and if it's too much of an ask so um personally I don't see that as as a as as is a reason for a rehearing because we do it all the time
and and I believe it's our right to do so as a board does that mean you're seconding my motion I I I would second your motion okay I'm going to take a a a vote please um Miss leedman is absent Mr Lopez is absent Mr
Klein to deny the re-hearing request Mr Reed denied uh Miss Weinstein Burman yes uh Mr wait wait wait I I mean to deny the motion yeah I'm I'm yes so it was sorry
the way it was no I'm I'm voting no against the motion I'm and Mr Brin to deny and Mr Pascal I'm voting yes to the motion to deny so that's passes 5 to one
what passes the motion is denied the rehearing is denied 5 to one yes but there's four of us here I'm sorry four to one four to one yes I mean five of us sorry there was four when you were in the restroom you needed you need sir you
need a majority so that would be um at least three of you need three thank you all for your time thank you thank you well so we're gonna we're going to take a a
short break for lunch uh if 15ish minutes we'll come back at 12:45 does that work M Mr chair uh if I if I may I have a hearing at Miami day County at 2 o'clock and I'm the next item so the as soon I don't even mind if you're eating
while we're talking but can we just stop for 15 minutes grab and and we'll pick up again as soon as we can Rec talk thank you appreciate it good afternoon everyone and uh welcome back to the uh second segment of
today's historic preservation board meeting uh moving on to our next application pass it over to you Debbie yes thank you uh welcome back everyone the next application on the agenda is HPB 20 20517 this is Ocean Terrace between 73rd
Street and 75th Street including portions of 73rd 74th and 75th streets um this is the site of Ocean Terrace Park an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the introduction of an elevated Pavilion structure within
the previously approved Ocean Terrace Park project uh the variance has been withdrawn so we will not be reviewing that uh today um regarding the background uh the board in um in July of 2019 the uh commission
adopted a development agreement with the property the property owner of the private land uh to the west of this site um part of that agreement was a responsibility of the developer to construct on a city-owned property in a
park that project was reviewed and approved by the historic preser ation board on September 13th 2020 um during that time the board also did approve some variances with regard to the oceanfront and dune overlays um as part of that approval the
board um saw a site plan which noted a a pavilion structure and outdoor bar counter uh at that point we did not have enough information regarding the structure and the board decided to include a condition in the order that that be brought back to the board which
is why the applicant is here before you today um The Pavilion is in this uh the substantially the same location as it was shown to you uh previously um but it has been redesigned and is now divided into three
sections um the center portion has a ported in place concrete roof that incorporates a cutout for for trees the applicant has also um revised the landscape plan for this immediate area of the park since the footprint of the
Pavilion um Cafe and bar has has been slightly modified um staff is generally supportive of the revised Pavilion design we don't do not have any objection uh to the location or design of the outdoor bar counter
uh and we remain eager to see this uh under construction and we are recommending approval subject to the conditions in the staff report I would like to note um that this particular structure has been reviewed by multiple
City departments um it has been reviewed by the police department it has been reviewed by the city's parks department who will be the owner ultimately of this structure since it is on uh will be in a city park it's on uh city land um and
the parks department did express some concern regarding the uh planter the integrated planter feature on the roof um so we do have a condition to address the parks department maintenance concerns the city is responsible for the maintenance of this facility um that
that be removed although we like the idea of that feature we do believe that there is adequate Landscaping um abundant Landscaping surrounding the structure um and we do not believe that the removal of that that feature that's integrated into the roof will have any
any adverse impact on the project and with that we can turn it over over to the applicant unless you have any questions for me good afternoon uh Mr chair uh niss casden and Cecilia Tores too of acran
representing the applicant Sandra Sher uh is also uh the principal of the adjacent uh ocean terrorist Associates and uh is the developer of this public Green Space uh as Debbie mentioned to
you and and you'll be hearing shortly from Damon Sanchez from Raymond jungles jungles has designed the entire public space as well as the Pavilion as Debbie mentioned just briefly uh this is pursuant to a development agreement between the city
and Ocean Terrace Holdings in which they are are paying $15 million approximately to convert Ocean Terrace into a public park and Pavilion tying into the beachwalk and uh and the NorthShore open space Park and uh this has been before
this design has been before the board it has been approved by the board including the Pavilion The Pavilion is one of the requirements of the development agreement that there be a cafe so that there's be some active use there and of course the bar counter is an accessory
to that active use so we're really here today only to look at the modifications to the Pavilion as well as to the proposed bar counter we are in full agreement with the requirements and additions of staff and as Debbie mentioned the request for the variance
has been withdrawn I'd like to turn it over to Damon if we could tee up the presentation please and Damon were you were you sworn in this morning if not I can swear you in now okay um do you swear that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth yes I do thank you and if we can go on to the
next let's Advance it a little bit uh as you can see there that is the uh Pavilion that's the Park and Pavilion space uh that was originally approved uh by this board if
we go to the next slide you'll see the proposed modification to the Pavilion and I turn it over to Damon to take you from here this point hi good afternoon I'm Damon representing Raymond jungles Incorporated so this is this slide shows
the updated Pavilion design also with the uh tree in the middle and a service path uh on the North side you could go to the next slide please this slide shows the
pergolas uh concrete pergola in the middle and then a uh waterproof pergola to the north Over the Bar and then a uh wooden pergola to the South next slide please
this is just the enlargement of that element and on the bottom just showing a reference image of what it could be and then uh just showing the elevation of that countertop as well next slide
please this is the planting plan uh using the same plant pallet that we have used throughout the park next slide please this is showing material imagery so just
showing that the concrete that we um are using throughout the park is also going to be used in The Pavilion and then the bottom image shows the Dune fence which is uh hidden or uh covered in the Dune vegetation next slide
please this shows uh a section at the top through the pergolas and then there's uh two elevations a South elevation and an East Elevation uh both all of these don't show the vegetation and the planting
also they don't show the Dune fence just wanted to note that uh next slide please this is the top is showing uh the west elevation showing a newly designed
Gates uh double gate at the front and then one uh single gate on the walkway up and then the two drawings on the bottom are a uh North elevation showing the Dune fence and then an enlargement of the uh west elevation showing the
gate or the gates next slide please this is just showing the plant uh pallet which we're using throughout the park and using here as well next slide please this is a rendering from under
the pergola inside the Pavilion next slide please this is a rendering from the Park area looking towards the beach and looking also through the Pavilion to the water next slide please and this is a rendering from the
beachwalk looking towards the Pavilion and pergolas and I believe that's it and that that's our uh Pres presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions thank you do we have uh any board
questions let's go uh ask all the questions first and then and back to the my only question is is there an operator for this venue yet no so this is you build it and then you try and find somebody to run it well there will be a
there will be a a a hotel brand and operator uh but there is not one as of this moment uh but remember this is part of uh the the plan that the city uh approved and agreed to includes the
Pavilion and the cafe so so there's not going to be an RFP from the city it'll be somebody from from the hotel what they'll be running it that's but the other thing I was going to say is in terms of the timing in order for them one of the first things that has to be done is the streetscape and park and so
this is an element of it so this needs to be approved so that that can move forward uh the the the full permitting of that and the construction of the of the approvement if we could just adhere to our own protocols and do all the questions ask all the questions and then
answer them together if that's okay yes thank you so I understand that this proposal is pursuant to the development agreement it's in the submission from the applicant it says
section 26.4 of the development agreement it says a developer has have a the right to construct and operate a raised Pavilion Cafe within the Park Street Street Cape streetscape site but then it says in accordance with the
minimum standards criteria and conditions set forth in sections 82- 385 to 82- 388 of the city code but I'm not familiar with those parts of the code and we didn't hear anything about it so
I was wondering if the applicant can explain to us how this proposal does is in accordance with the minimum standards criteria and conditions of sections 82- 385 to 82- 388 of the city code because that's written in the development
agreement I think that was all reviewed by staff just go go I'm sorry do all the questions that's okay Barry so the the last time this came through um when they came for an amendment to increase um the
density of the buildings um I asked Mr Jungle um some questions about the park and he was unable to answer those and um I'm still
wondering about uh views and th this this design is is this presentation is focusing in on the corner close to 75 Street and I'm I'm really wondering about how people are going to perceive
the ocean uh anymore other than just on the beachwalk and um in reference to the um what what was just raised about the minimum standards um is that what set the area
for this Pavilion and if I'm not staying at the hotel am I not not allowed in this Pavilion um if I want a place to sit in the shade um and drink my water or am I
am I not am I restricted from doing so um I think there's a lot of things about this Pro the Project's going to help the area in a lot of ways but in a lot of ways it was sort of a giveaway and and
that's one of the thing you know that sit doesn't sit well with me and I hope it becomes an activated area um and that people still go there and use it um residents of the
area but so I'm very concerned about how how the view is is uh maintained from from the what's now the street um to the ocean and size and
access thanks Barry all thank you for a complete uh application no no questions so I've got a bunch of questions which will come as a surprise to to nobody probably
um and first of all just to point off I don't believe what happened here is doable anymore after the last voter referendum right I mean now to transfer uh public right away would
require a voter referendum so um so what a great opportunity you all have and and as a North Beacher I'm I'm hoping um as as I think all North beachers are for um a really great outcome with this project
and and excited about it um I think some questions that just general questions have to do with uh which have kind of been touched on but how the management of this location is going to work uh who will be managing it um I think with
regard to this project just generally speaking since it was will have originally have been a right of way I think uh the community is very interested in knowing about the accessibility right how accessible this space will remain the hour
you know who it will be open to which I think Barry sort of touched on um I wanted to ask too as far as the design is concerned because there's three different roofs technically that are all inter attached um and I wanted to know first
of all why what was the reason for that of having three roofs I'm also um trying to get a clearer sense which is hard from the Aerials and then from the images I'm not 100% % sure if if I feel
that it's well represented but that um the continuity of space um seems like it might be pretty intense for public area since there isn't really a break between those three different roof lines um I also wanted to
ask um with regard to and so I'm interested in hearing I guess a little more how those spaces are articulated between those three different roof lines and how uh the massing of the space is broken up so again I think the
expectation is that this is going to feel like park space and when you put three roofs together I'm concerned if it's going to feel too intense like it isn't really park space but a giant Pavilion um and then I wanted to ask about the materials the wood um
concerned about since it's city property becomes city property the maintenance of the wood and and what kind of wood it's going to be and how durable it's going to be uh because it seems like it'll be the city's problem once and if it starts to deteriorate so um and my last question
which I have to throw in uh is just to ask about the maintenance of the buildings on Ocean Terrace and everyone will know what I'm talking about without me beinga a dead horse um but I'm I'm very eager to know um why those buildings aren't being maintained and
and why Ocean Terrace isn't looking as beautiful as it could even though um the Broadmore and teisa are fantastic local places to go they're amazing places for uh locals to bring residents and for them to stay at And yet when they walk
down the street it's not so nice so thank you shall I respond now Mr chair you can respond all okay and first I also uh would like to mention I failed to uh mention in my presentation the letters of support from The Neighbors the Sant Trope which is
the only and the major Residential Building on that street has supported this as well as Betsy Perez who lives at 7605 colons as a single family residence just a block away so the neighbors support this now to answer the questions with respect to the compliance with code
Provisions Mr Reed uh the staff report does a detailed analysis of the relevant code provisions and the fact that they are consistent with those Provisions can can I ask followup then can you show me where in the staff report it refers to
sections 82- 385 um Mr Reed I can respond uh Section 8 or chapter 82 deals with the uh Sidewalk Cafe standards which are uh cafes that are allowed on on city
property so the the development agreement is not under review today by this board the development agreement alludes to the minimum standards required for sidewalk cafes okay well I understand from the
presentation and the submissions that we're here today to re review and approve the raise Pavilion Cafe within the park streetcape site and the the section of the development agreement
that says that provided such Pavilion Pavilion Cafe is approved by the HPB so we're here because they need our approval but it also says just before that it says they shall have the right to construct it in accordance with the minimum standards criteria and
conditions set forth in those sections of the code and nobody's even told us what what's those parts of the code so how can we decide that it's consistent it's not up to you to decide well yes it is that your your criteria is is you
have 100% jurisdiction on the design of the Pavilion and the bar structure the criteria that you're required to review in accordance with is the certificate of appropriateness criteria that is outlined in the staff report the development agreement which is approved
by the the city manager and the city commission is something separate in aart so the development agreement requires them to have to maintain the minimum standards for sidewalk cafes but that is that is not reviewed by this particular
board board your your criteria are the certificate of appropriateness criteria those are operating standards which are not before this board read They're not necessarily operating standards they are design standards they're not in any of
the submissions from the applicant and it's not from any referred to in the staff report so I can't say what the record reflects about those parts of the code that are relevant because they're expressly mentioned in
the de part of the development agreement that says the HPB board has to refer refer to it but so I pulled it up on my phone and I see that the minimum standards 3 82- 385 there are a number of them and I think it would be helpful
to the board if it could be explained to us and how this proposal does meet those standards the first one says the permit shall take any and all actions to assure that its use of the public public right away in no way way interferes with
pedestrians utilizing the right away and in no way limits their free unobstructed passage there to that's just the very first criteria and and I agree with Mr Pascal that this is a public property I
mean that the uh uh Miss Hackett the first thing that you said earlier on you answered my first question who owns the property right so even though the right of way was dedicated where the applicant has an
easement or a right of use or whatever but the city owns it and so I think it's very important that things like Public rightaway Access and unobstructed free passage is going
to be very high in this board's consideration of the design and and um the next criteria is about how uh what the minimum distance is of sidewalk cafes from pedestrian paths and other
features um about the locations of tables and chairs about objects around the perimeter so those are all design criteria no they are not Mr and so okay well you can say no they're not I don't
think that's a proper way to address some sir you have a board attorne Mr Reed you have made a point of that is important for applicants and boards to follow the law and deal with what they are empowered you are empowered to deal
with design issues those are issues that deal with operation of a sidewalk cafe and I would also point out that it's important to note this that we are talking about is a raised Pavilion that has already been approved by by the
board that is designed to be a cafe that's not even before the board today it's only the bar counter and the and and the roofing change the standards that you were even pointing to Under The Sidewalk Cafe ordinance deal with the typical Sidewalk
Cafe if you have a Sidewalk Cafe adjacent to a hotel or a restaurant you know how do you operate it but again all of that is outside of the purview of this board okay well I don't think it's proper while a board member is making
comments for an applicant or anybody else to interrupt and stop somebody from talking I respect your point of view and I listen to your point of view carefully okay the fact that I'm saying that I'm reading this and it looks like design standards for you to just say no they're
not and then to cut me off and take it off like my view points are irrelevant I don't think that's proper sir I was just responding to the question there's no question I'm making a statement here that that these particular parts of the code were not addressed at all in the
application or the staff report and they do guide the design of the project and it is on a public property and I personally and I think the rest of the board should want to know how this
application satisfies those parts of the code where not that the code that's mentioned in the development agreement that gives us that gives us the responsibility to to to review and approve it it's in the same
sentence that that we review and approve it and that the minimum standards have to be met and then just to say well they've approved it's already been reviewed by staff but the staff report doesn't refer to it then we're totally handling this with blinders on can we
just go through all the questions first and then and then we'll talk about it when we get into board deliberation is that okay all right appreciate it thank you may I continue Mr chair with the answers and I've been asked the City attorney as well to opine on these
issues uh there were also questions with regard to the uh from Mr Klein the views and how people will perceive the ocean uh and uh with respect to that of course as we know the entire the entirety of the streetscape has been
approved the Pavilion has been approved save for the modifications we are now that are now before you uh and those have I so and I think when you can look at the renderings that and the plans
that have been prepared it is an open Pavilion and so people can see right right through it if there if there are questions to it uh I'm sure Damon can answer them uh with with regard to again
the the uh the operational issues of course we have to understand and you you had a couple matters here earlier in the day before the board involving the where Tantra used to be and where uh the Commodore Hotel is the operational stuff is not before is not before this board
and not for the board to consider uh in term it's the the design it's the things that the other things Mr Klein and others have mentioned uh just by of information in terms of it is going to be it will be privately operated but it will be open
to the public uh now that's again not before the board but you should know that that's what that's what it's called for so um in terms of uh and I think that gets to some of Mr Pascal's questions
obviously the the management who will management manage it is not before the board at this time but that will be determined in in in in the future uh and it is going to be accessible and open to the public uh another question was asked
uh with regard to three roofs and the continuity of the roof and I will defer to Damon to answer that and of course the final comment and question was regard to maintenance of buildings on Ocean Terrace again that's not before
the board but uh the the owners of Ocean Terrace Holdings has kept up and operated as you know the Broadmore the Broadmore Hotel and the restaurants there uh occasionally there are violations uh but they are uh quickly
repaired and uh taken care of like if someone puts graffiti on there and uh there is a level of safety and activity that's better than it was before they had taken possession of the properties there but that again is uh just for informational purposes but I turned to
Damon with respect to the any questions with regard to the roofing systems yeah so regarding the roof or the pergolas I think a simple answer would just be to break up the scale of that Pavilion the three roofs do that
really well because the the central roof is the highest ceiling height the highest headro and it's also the biggest area and then on the sides are kind of little more intimate spaces so they have you know a slightly warmer materials and uh the weatherproofed one is over the
bar so it uh you know that was a necess necessity also something that may not have been represented the underside of both uh trellises is the same material so they'll look the same from below I think you mentioned something about continuity so they will look the same from below so it's going to look like
two two types instead of three thank you sorry I had another question that I hope can get addressed go ahead um because I and I wrote it down when when Debbie said it what that the parks department wants to Omit that that ring
of uh planter on on that concrete roof and um one was what's their concern why and two how does that affect you know the design and especially with these two
other structures coming into it it just seems to make it pop up more as opposed to being you know fitting in with all the other Lush landscape so I can I can respond to to the parks department concern I'm not speaking for them but um in my
conversations with them um there currently there's no there's nothing shown to access those Planters right and our our parks department has in-house maintenance workers we don't hire private companies that are specialized in more sophisticated um Green Building green
roof type Solutions so it is the it's concerned with you know with water um water drainage in those Planters as well as just access to them putting people on ladders to um to
maintain the plants what if the plants die likely from from my perspective and from my experience um we would left be left without living plant material in the those moving forward in the future well I'd say
um for years I've been a major fan of Raymond jungle work um but if the city needs to maintain his work um his work if you wanted to put it into fashion is kind of
like the dress I saw now I forgot her name sorry big red dress um I'm sorry lizo thank you sorry um her here it's it's that dress versus the famous black
skirt um the work is great but the work is detailed the work is Lush and you know if you can't if you don't trust your city staff to maintain the
ring of uh some whatever is growing up there we've got some future problems down the road with dead plants and uh I guess after the first year and overgrown stuff I mean you're going to have to get and trim these
things you're gonna they're going to have to get on a ladder but you know and I think the 1100 block of Lincoln Road is a great example beautiful beautiful design very sophisticated and there was a learning curve for for the um I don't
know what it was it first 15 years or so it was maintained by a private company that the developer um had actually uh commissioned um it's now maintained by the city so there is a learning curve with some of those living water features
um and it's it's not something that the city has the resources to do a lot of because it is very specialized we have a large Parks maintenance crew they do a great job especially within ground
Landscaping um but they were concerned with their capabilities moving forward I'm very confident that the inground Landscaping um will be maintained in accordance with uh the jungle plan um they were just didn't want to take on
the added responsibility of landscape integrated into architecture which is something that the parks department dealing primarily with with at grade Landscaping um saw that could be problematic in the
future so these built-in raised Planters are okay with them just not yes correct and and we work back and forth with them and they are comfortable um with the remainder of the Landscaping I'll you come back in five years and
see I just have one clarifying question for you Damon with regard to these roofs it's a little hard to to tell on the um elevation so the cement roof meets the wood roof on either or the masonry roof
meets a wood roof on either side and there's a gap in between or they slide up to each other or how how does it actually yeah there's it's designed to be a space in between them how much space is in between them I mean and
height maybe a foot or less about a foot about a foot or less yeah so the light comes in okay okay thank you I have another question uh I'd like to know where the uh tables chairs uh
busing stations carts and things will be stored when the uh Cafe is not in operation they'll they'll be stored in compliance with whatever the city code requires well where well this is again under
understand Mr Reed this is not a there are elements of The Sidewalk Cafe ordinance that will apply to its operation but this is not a Sidewalk Cafe this is this raised Pavilion defined in the development agreement is a cafe and so it will have the tables
and chairs they will be there in the Pavilion they're not they don't they're not taken out and uh you know off the sidewalk each and every time and each and every day but I see on um L LH 504 there's
cabinets um looks like those are permanent lockable cabinets I'm not sure if uh tables and chairs can fit in there but it looks like they they made some really good details on how a lot of these will be on casters as well so they'll be movable at times when when
not in use right should we go ahead and open it up to uh public comments sure before we do that are there any disclosures the board members would like to make seeing none we can open up the public hearing any members of the public on Zoom please
raise your hand um anyone in commission Chambers please step forward hi Matthew ganof with the Miami Design preserv a league mdpl remains alarmed at the severe neglect taking
place at the ocean terrce site this includes a loss of one of the key myo buildings along that property and multiple code violations we request assurances from the property owners that they will fulfill their obligations to maintain and restore the
structures along Ocean Terrace the HPB must hold owners accountable for neglect the properties before it's too late thank you any anyone else okay so we'll close the public hearing and open it up to board comments
and deliberations steuart okay I was asking about where the chairs and furniture and everything would be stored because that part of the code I was asking about before that's
referenced in the development agreement and as part of HPB approval that that part of the code is not addressed in the staff report or in the applicants submissions and I would like information
from the staff and the applicant about that be for example I'm looking section 380 I mean 82- 385 part K it says all tables chairs umbrellas and any other Sidewalk Cafe
Furniture shall be readily removable and shall not be physically attached chained or in any other manner a fixed to any public structure Street Furniture signage or other public fixtures or to a curb or other public right away and then
part L says Sidewalk Cafe furniture and I understand that uh Mr Kasin says that this is not a Sidewalk Cafe but the part of the development agreement says that they have to comply with the Sidewalk Cafe regulations it's there in black and
white it says Sidewalk Cafe Furniture including without limitation rolling service stations service carts and busing stations may only be maintained in The Sidewalk Cafe permit area during hours of operation permitted however that Planters which cannot be read
removed May remain within the permanent area subject to the provisions of subsection Q here of and there's there's a lot of conditions in here those are just two that I'm picking out as I'm scrolling really quickly and which is why I'm saying I don't feel that we're given the information we need to make a
decision properly uh uh Miss Berger Weinstein just pointed out before that there are storage structures there and I just read from the code the only things that can be there are planters so and and then there's there's a a a
bar structure too does that count as as part of it so I I think in order to make a a a a proper evaluation and and decision on this we
need to have before us how those parts of the code on how private businesses on public properties are operated that we need to be satisfied that those are being met and not just saying okay
we got a great staff thankful that they're looking out for us we're here to do a job Mr chair c if I could let let staff respond first please thank you so the Sidewalk
Cafe section which is chapter 82 is in the public property section of the code that code is enforced by the city's public works department uh Mr casden is correct that this this is technically not a Sidewalk Cafe in the traditional
sense because it's not in the right of way um I think the Sidewalk Cafe Provisions also do allow for exceptions in on Lincoln Road and have different regulations for different areas of the city to a certain extent um the development
agreement uh was reviewed by the city manager's office and by the city attorney's office the plans that we have have been determined to be consistent with the development agreement so the plans that are before you today have been reviewed by the city
manager can and so the manager's office and the City attorney are the the two entities that that review the development agreements and make sure what is being proposed within city-owned property is consistent with the development agreement that determination
has been made which is is why all of those criteria are not responded to in your report because your duty is to review a certificate of appropriateness in accordance with the certificate of appropriateness criteria
not to determine if the project is consistent with the development agreement well Mr chair are we in the deliberation part now where we're all making our comments I thought I was first because we had our chance to ask questions the applicant and the staff
had a chance now it seems that what they're trying to do when I'm making my points for our deliberations is they're just trying to take the the the winds out of of my sales for my arguments I think I'm making valid points that don't need to be undercut every time I I open
my mouth where we're at the deliberations point and my point is that we don't have anything before us about those criteria and it's there in black and white that this has to satisfy those criteria and everybody uh on the other side of this day keeps telling us oh it
is don't worry about it my point is that it's not before us and we need to and this is public property we're not talking about how private property is going to be used and I agree with your sentiment Mr Pascal that this is very
much public land being given up for private use I would think if if the um development agreement agement said to must comp whether they call it a
sidewalk Sidewalk Cafe or a hole in the or lemonade stand doesn't matter to me but they said use these rules and then if the um powers of be the city manager's office or whoever um decided to deviate
from those rules that would have been documented and and that's not being brought to us saying hey these are the rules that that were laid out and these were the approved deviations from those rules and so you
know again I'm not an attorney but when we come up when items come to us and then if we make decisions and then they're based on incorrect information you know what comes back to
us um you know um does it come back and it is not necessarily mud on our face but does it come back that somebody objects for some some reason there's always somebody who
objects to something and brings something back and you approved this and you were wrong and and I want to feel like my feet are on good standing Mr chair may I make a Mr Cassie can we just go through board deliberations first
just moving yes the only thing I want to say is there's a there's a mistake of law in the statements that are being made that I do believe needs to be clarified I would like because at the very beginning of the meeting every meeting our chairman
explains to us how we go about it and this isn't the part of the meeting where we're having debate with anybody please just get through the board deliberations and give everybody their opportunity and and I think we're with you Barry right now could could we hear from Nick I
would that opportunity because thankfully you have an attorney um so so I I just just I've been listening and and I've been taking notes and and there are a couple points I'd like to make um the Salk Cafe ordinance as a general
rule um applies to sidewalk cafes which are defined term temporary use on the public right of way um the development agreement between the city and ocean terce Holdings provides for a raised
Pavilion or Cafe within the park streetscape site and that's that's the that's the the geographic area where um where the application before you today um includes right um what the development agreement does is it
incorporates as a guideline certain provisions of the Sidewalk Cafe ordinance and what the what the development agreement specifically says is that the developer shall have the right to construct and operate a raise Pavilion SL Cafe within the park
streetcape site generally consistent with the Salk Cafe permit requirements as set forth in chapter 82 of city code so the Salk Cafe ordinance you complete the sentence though it doesn't stop
there it doesn't stop there Mr Reed I haven't I haven't interrupted you but I will I will complete the sentence thank you um as set forth in chapter 82 of the city code and in accordance with the minimum standards criteria and conditions set forth in sections 82- 385
to 82- 388 of the city code provided such Pavilion Cafe is approved by the HPB this section shall survive the termination or expiration of this agreement so the improvements that are the subject of this application those improvements
are properly before you this application is properly before you um but like any other application the criteria that you are bound by is the appropriateness criteria in in chapter 118 article 10 of the city
code so so your role today is is not to make an interpretation under the development agreement it's not to apply uh the regulations in the Salk Cafe ordinance although you have you know you have the right to ask questions about an application that's you know that's your
right um but your role is to look at the design the proposed design of these improvements and determine whether they are consistent with the appropriateness criteria in the city code if you have particular questions um that the that that the applicant or the city are in a
position to to answer you know we will answer them but your role is not to make interpretations under the sidewalk CFE ordinance um Your Role is to look at physical uh physical improvements at permanent improvements um through the
lens of the appropriateness criteria in the in the historic preservation ordinance thanks Nick any anything else Barry you want um I I didn't have any comments um I think you know to to the point it is
kind of difficult to to separate operations from the physical because for example I'm looking on lh409 which shows this beautiful open air Pavilion with Planters and and board formed concrete and it looks fantastic and then I'm
looking at l504 and it shows that all of these systems which you know is necessary for a functioning bar Pavilion as removable so in my opinion I think having that flexibility until you have an operator um makes a lot of sense um
I'm I'm very supportive of the project I would Echo you know I I do hear from a lot of people in North Beach that want to see the overall project move forward and and I hope that this uh gets it closer to that stage thank you thanks Laura
Ray okay um okay so so I'm actually really excited about this um it's a great team I'm really excited to uh to have Raymond jungles be doing a project in North Beach um when Northshore open
space park at the time uh was being considered um My Hope was that Raymond jungles would have been the one to do that project but he's doing this one and I'm I'm I'm super excited about it um I'm also very
uh very uh in tune with the uh Community individuals who are concerned with maintaining the uh Community ownership the feel uh that it's a community space uh so the questions I ask regarding that
um a reflection of that um in any case I think it's a really nice design uh I did want to ask one question since this has been sort of bifurcated or or take it a a piece out in terms of the actual
square footage that's being devoted to this Pavilion and the original project because I don't remember I mean is it the same are there any distinctions is is this growing is it drinking is it I believe the area is slightly larger than
the footprint that was shown previously okay pavilion's the same size the the the roofing is a little bit larger Roofing is a little larger and and um and as I I referred to previously I think
um as you clarified Damon the um the fluctuation in in the roof levels I think is a nice idea to help break it up honestly um I feel like a foots I would like you know if there was one design input I might say why only a foot
because it almost looks like we thought about it but not really and why not just open it up so that there really is like a sight line out of the roof when you're inside and it really does feel more open um other than that I'm um I'm supportive
of the project and and obviously I wanted to succeed and be amazing for North Beach so thank you I don't know if anyone would like to make a motion one other point I wanted to make too in defense of you Stewart um because I've
heard this a couple of times today uh of what we don't have jurisdiction over and I think it's important for folks to consider that even though we don't have jurisdiction as a board over the use of a property um the use for us obviously
informs the way that it's designed obviously it needs to be designed with a specific use in mind so I don't think it's always fair to attack the board for for for taking an interest in what the intended use is of a project I think it's uh innocent enough and and direct
enough um you know wanting to get a perspective on that I don't know if anyone wants to comment further to make a motion yes one one one comment I mean I understand that the reason why we're considering this is because the city
vacated Street ends and and the property owner agreed to provide a public park in the street areas and in return the the property
owner got things of value in return I I don't know if it's the the the increased F but it looks like this private this public property now is being set aside for private
uses and I don't think that was the intent I could see that the agreement does allow for a a raised Pavilion and a cafe okay but I think it's very important for us to
understand how pedestrian flow is going to be how Public Access is going to be if it's going to what what the uh very scientific word what the vibe is is going to be if it's going to feel like it's public or private and that's why
the details do matter as far as how everything is going to be built into that property if it's into that space if it's going to comply with the ordinance Sidewalk Cafe ordinance
that this this this binding agreement specifically says it must and I'm and I don't think that we got the information we need to make that determination does uh anybody open to making a motion any further comments any
requests I moveed to deny it is there a second on that okay so I I'll amend my motion then to continue be because of my friends friendly suggestion move to continue difference
okay we need a date certain on that continue to the October what is the October meeting 18th the 18th October if that's enough time for for for them well it doesn't sound like you're making you're requesting any design changes just some additional information well if
if any design changes are required so that when the additional information is provided we can see that changes were made so that standards are met because I don't think that they should come back and say these are the standards and then we see that they're
not met I would like there to be changes if they're required in order to meet the standards that were not addressed today I mean are any design changes being requested at this point well I I personally as I mentioned say that as I
look at this it looks like a very large part of public property that was part of a development agreement that the public was going to get something of value but now it looks like the patrons of this business are going to get value and the
business not necessarily the public it's not like a beach cafe where you walk off the beach and you could get a slushier or something you know and cool off this is for people to sit down and and dine and and and it preempts public space with private uses but hadn't it been
clarified that the city city retains ownership of this space correct so the city retains ownership okay so then let's let's put a a a cafe like this in lumus park and flaming let's do it everywhere I think the board just needs
to be clear about what the purpose of the continuance is so we would we would need that on the record so I I a continuance so that the applicants can can show the board how the requirements
of uh section 26.4 of the development agreement are all met with specifically that the standards minimum standards criteria and conditions of sections 82- 385 to 82-
388 of the city Cod or met if they can show us at that time that the application as it is today without modification meet those standards okay fine but um just my glance of it I think is the the concerns about pedestrian
flow and and and Furniture and Things on public spaces I'm I'm not I I don't I don't know that that as it stands today that the the plans would meet those standards I feel more comfortable that because the way when Nick when you read
it you said generally um abide by these rules well that means that somebody May those decisions so I imagine those those decisions were made documented and dated
so I would like to know that information but but it does say generally but then after a comma it says and in accordance with the minimum standards Criterion conditions so generally consistent with chapter 82 but then it says and in
accordance with the minimum standards and criteria of those particular sections so it sort of focuses is in on that it's not just everything is generally I want something to go forward is but I want it to go forward the right
way and I want to be able to to know that you know I was part of the right thing and not making the wrong decision any other comments board discussion I mean my understanding is nothing in what if if this were approved
nothing in what we would be doing would be waving any of the city code um and so I don't see the reason for it even though I I respect what you're saying and I know that the questions haven't been specifically answered sorry and and that requirement
from what I understand they would still be bound to that requirement the space would be no matter what we're not providing a waiver of that we have a motion was that a second on your part Barry I'll say second it okay so we'll put that to a
vote to what date October October 18th um let me call the role Miss Weinstein Burman no Mr Reed yes Mr Brin no Mr Klein yes Mr Pascal no okay okay so that
motion fails do we have another motion would any board member like to make a different motion I'll make a motion to approve with conditions that staff has recommended do we have a second I'll
second okay let me call the role if this fails that's wor that's a denial am I correct correct how many votes do we need three three or four four don't we just need a majority of those present no because I I I think for
a certificate of appropriateness is for affirmative votes give me one second earlier today Deborah said the reason we took the other things out of line was that that you know other than that it was a majority I thought that one needed five votes that
particular application because it included so can can I ask are there any for uh I mean I think we know where everyone stands on this vote um for those who are dissenting I mean are there any conditions that could be
ridden in that would Garner your approval is there anything that could be done so that this public space would feel like a public space I mean are there assurances that could be written into the order that would make you feel comfortable that
that were to be the case if I thought there were I would suggest them fair enough very well like I said I want that's why I asked if this this fails it would be a denial and I do want
this um I mean it's gone down the road the decision was made previously to approve it um and and now we're here I I question the
process right or wrong um but Deborah could you re-qualify exactly what we're voting on today the application before you is for a certificate of appropriateness for the
design of the Pavilion structure the final design of the Pavilion structures and the bar counter that is it and nothing more correct can we restate within the approval that it must abide by
the in the storage Provisions is as part of the city code I mean that's what's in question here right that it's abiding by The Sidewalk Cafe whatever those Provisions are you were reading Nick no I mean is that what's in question here
I'm not sure what specifically is in question but I think if the board wanted to include a condition that the um that the that the that the CVA be consistent with that the design be consistent with the development agreement that's
fine I'll make that friendly amendment I just have a comment on the amendment that's sort of like you know sending up a prayer balloon that's that's what it's worth do we do we do a straw pole I'm
not sure we want to anyone was dying to kill this so maybe it's better we know a stra if we move forward with this as a straw pole um could we just do a poll with the with the amendment yes with the
amendment that the the design shall be consistent with the development agreement okay let me call the role Mr Klein well why can't we do that here why can't we that that respectfully the the board's role is not to interpret or
apply um the the development agreement between the city and Ocean Terrace Holdings so your role is to apply the certificate of appropriateness criteria in chapter 118 article 10 um of the city code if you have specific issues or
conditions that you'd like to impose within your Authority Under This the appropriateness criteria that that that would be more than appropriate but but this board um you know does not enforce the development agreement this board does not enforce the Salk Cafe ordinance
you you you are empowered to review the design of what's before you through the lens of the appropriateness criteria but but it's a quasi judicial hearing so we're supposed to apply the law and the
facts okay that's correct okay okay well we do have a motion in a second we can do a straw poll Mr chair if I prefer to do a straw pole if the alternative is that we would be killing it I don't think that really is the intent here okay Mr
Brin Mr Reed no Mr Klein Miss Miss Weinstein Burman Mr Pascal yes okay so I call the role so this is
now not a straw poll this is not a straw poll anymore Mr Bren Mr Reed no Mr Klein yes Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Pascal yes thank you very muches um Mr chair if if I could have a
minute I uh I wanted to specifically address some of the concerns of mdpl and the concerns that you brought up because I know it's not necessarily part of the hearing but it is important to talk about um so we are constantly dealing with um the
conditions of our property and there's a pretty good record of INSP inspections 40-year certifications permits you know expense we just spent about $560,000 on the Broadmore doing a concrete
restoration job um we are currently dealing with the 40 your certification for 7436 um and uh and in general um we' we've really tried to keep the properties operating and up and running
which has been as you know even through covid and now uh it's been a pretty big financial hardship um to the tune of multiple seven figures a year but keeping the properties open and keeping the block activated is something that we always committed to do and it's
something that when we work very closely with the police department you know they've obviously been very clear with us that you know the alternative if these properties aren't open is going to be a lot worse um so in addition to that we've you know we've hired uh off-duty
police officers to come and do patrols because our Police Department only has so many resources to actually get out there so we get a certain number of days a week for a beat and so we need extra beat Patrol we need extra you know care taken with the homeless and we've you know we've got our little crime watch
set up we've got direct contact with them on in terms of some of the um other kind of public ills that happen up in in our area with the drug dealing and and all of that we obviously we're running a hotel we have families that come there we're trying to you know keep this as as
best we can so you know um one of the things that was requested by mdpl was an affirmation that we are absolutely committed to maintaining all the facades and everything in the hbb approval and that you know you have my again my commitment on I can repeat that um um
the building that's in the middle of the block that ended up needing to be demolished um that building if you remember going way back to our original historic preservation board approval in 2018 was always slated for Demolition and that historic preservation board
approval approve that building for demolition Demolition and replication we did our best to keep it at a certain point it was no longer safe and there was a fear that the actual facade in the building could fall down on the sidewalk and so through an emergency order of
demolition um that we needed to comply with because of an unsafe structures violation we had no choice but to demolish the building which was you know not a again not something that we wanted or to we wouldn't we didn't want to do that at a sequence obviously the Optics
of it are not great um but that is still planned for uh the replication as per the hbb approval um and I just wanted to give you that assurance and give mdpl that Assurance because that was something that was that was on their uh on their agenda so hopefully that helps
uh respond to your concerns thanks and uh clarification question for you real quick Broadmore changing of the spelling why so there is a hotel named the Broadmore in Colorado Springs and they called us and said you are violating our
trademark and I was thought well you know come on this thing was built in 1940 I can't possibly be violating your trademark and they said our trademark goes back to 1904 and so what we agreed with them uh was that we would we agreed that we will
keep the historic spelling as you know we repli replicated the historic original signage on the building with the red letters and we would keep that and that's what you have there today which is a new sign that we that we put up uh but on our website and our um you
know any sort of marketing material we had to change it to M uh they said that they had guests of their it's a fivar resort in Colorado Springs that booked our place in Miami and were slightly underwhelmed thank you thank you for
being here okay thank you thank you very much to the board and thank you Mr Klein specifically thank you appreciate it thank nice to see you I have a question since um
what what happens uh in five years when um maybe occupancies are low and and the the this Pavilion may not be kept up correctly and the P either it gets
closed or The Operators change um in the meantime is the city the city doesn't have to maintain this right it could just be an empty structure well I mean the city's required to maintain it in terms of the property maintenance standards to
operate it the city does not have an obligation to operate it so we could have a closed gated Pavilion well that's kind of the reason why everything was designed to be removable and and well we could have a so then it would be removable and the
gates would be open well it's it's it's designed to be a public space today and it's designed to be a public space in the future but it can it can it can morph so if the city said well we don't want to in your sort of nuclear scenario
here where there's no nobody running it um City said we don't want to have a you know an amenity for our public we just want to make it an elevated deck then that's very easy to do yeah that that was a consideration okay well thank you all
very much thank you appreciate it okay uh getting toward the end of the agenda we have two applications left the next application uh is HPB 22530 these are Citywide bus shelters uh
the transportation department from the city has filed an application uh requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the design of new Citywide bus shelters um the history of this particular project um goes back a
tremendous way um back to 2015 when the city first contemplated um a desire to enhance the bus shelters including enhan technology um within the shelters uh for for the use of of residents and visitors
uh the board actually approved a Citywide design um back in 2018 so that was approved by both this board and the design review board because this is a Citywide Endeavor um and since that time unfortunately uh the city was not able
to obtain um a proposal for the construction of those elements the design before you today um is substantially similar to the previously approved shelters um with some minor changes um the changes are really a
result of the cost effectiveness of constructing these again the previously approved uh structures were not able to be constructed due to the cost and the you know the vast number of these our goal would be to have wherever we have room throughout the city to have covered
shelters at every stop which we currently do not have um um these new shelters would also integrate um significant technology upgrades in terms of um Bus arrival times and other messaging um during emergencies and in
in evacuations real time information which we think is very important and is commensurate with the city of our our quality to have that that uh amenity for our residents and visitors um the the design will have um
integrated solar technology not for the ad portions but for the real time uh Transportation information and other notifications um we are supportive of the of the design
um and are recommending approval and I'm Milos um Milos I would pronounce your last name but I would butcher it I would not do it justice um so you can introduce yourself but Milos is uh the assistant director of the planning or the trans a department um and he is very
knowledgeable on this subject he has been involved for the process um since at least 2015 if not before then um so he's available and I'm is going to give a short presentation thank you very much debie good afternoon everyone just a question before we start should we wait
for Mr pressling or we're good to proceed um I think he's going to come right back yeah so you can proceed Milos and Milos yeah I was gonna say um do you swear that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you thank
you so once again good afternoon all uh my name is MIL Milos Movic I'm assistant director of transportation and mobility department I'll provide a little background again and then we'll go into the design of the bus shelters and presentation uh so the existing bus shelters were really installed more than
20 20 years ago it was a back in 2001 and in 2015 the city commission directed us to update the existing design uh with the goal of achieving iconic design and providing really shelters that would help promote uh Transit use in the city which is consistent with our
transportation master plan and also uh our goal of becoming less car Centric City uh deficiencies of the existing bus shelter design that were identified at that time uh were limited protection from the elements such as sun and Rain
uh was a lack of Passenger security lighting so for the most part overnight it would stay dark uh it was a lack of Technology elements such as estimated the time of the uh bus or trolley arrival um they are very heavy structure um and very complex for removal or
installation at new locations and also current design uh prevents installation really at any of the bus stops that are of limited RightWay they really require at about uh 20 ft by 10 ft space in order to be installed uh as a result
only about 100 of existing 300 bus stops do have a shelter so so Dei provided some uh background in terms of uh you know how we got here uh we really uh secured in 2016 Akai and pin Farina they designed those original iconic shelters
uh those shelters were approved by the rbn hbb as Wella City commission um we uh did have solicitation out there which uh didn't result any um interest or proposals we conducted industry review meetings and U industry basically stated
uh that for the amount of shelters uh and for the design it would be just cost prohibitive to to to move ahead with those uh we revised that design we had a follow-up solicitation and the only uh really proposal that we got is uh from out from media uh I have a couple of
members of out from media here with me U and we ultimately uh executed agreement uh with from media in 2020 October of 2021 I'm sorry um and um this agreement will result in installation of about anywhere between 200 and 250 bus
shelters around the city uh each one of them with the estimated time of arrival signs uh we will also be installing some about 100 bicycle racks and um benches uh in case um any of the bus stops are left without the shelter but really the goal is to uh have a bus shelter at each
one of the bus stops uh from October of last year uh outr has been working very closely with us to develop a new bu shelter design using alternative design and Engineering approach that is in line with the city's original design developed by Akay and pininfarina uh
while reducing uh fabrication cost so that we can maximize the number of shelters um uh the the presentation that will be before you uh was already and the design concept was already approved by the city commission uh via resolution
uh earlier this year in May um and uh the goal again is to create attractive bu shelter equipped with um advertising uh security camera at some of the key locations um estimated time of arrival of the buses uh passenger seating security lighting and uh so forth uh
this is really significant Improvement U as compared to the existing bus shelters and uh we really believe that uh all these proposed improvements in terms of the uh features of the bus uh shelter and the stop will uh be very helpful in promoting Transit Service uh will have a
positive impact on Transit ridership and help us reduce congestion help promote use of Transit service and uh achieve our goal of becoming less car Centric uh uh City uh PJ if you wouldn't mind would you bring up presentation I would go to slide number
four it's page four out of 27 perfect uh so as part as part of design development we wanted to ensure that uh this new design uh really addresses all deficiencies of the existing shelters which again are lack of coverage from the elements uh lack of
Passenger uh security lighting um lack of Technology components and uh and the cameras uh passenger security cameras are some of the key locations um as well as heavy structure uh and uh and the fact that the exiting shelters require very large space for installation so uh
design has various uh sizes to properly accommodate bus stops of larger and smaller footprint uh the shelter that you see here on the on the present presentation is really about 20 ft uh long by 7t uh wide and we have couple of
more sizes uh one uh is 20 ft long by 3T wide and uh the other two are 10t long uh and either uh seven or 3T wide uh those uh shelter that are a little more narrow uh would be uh the shelters that we would use at a locations of a limited
right away where we have only five uh foot side Valk or or or uh similar um all of these bu shelters will have a security lighting um there is uh if you look to the right uh hand column on the opposite side of the uh advertisement
box there is a that little flag that is an estimated time of arrival sign um and um each uh one of them will have uh either seating element uh leaning elements uh or combination of both really to best address uh passenger
demand uh uh uh coverage within the shelter is enhanced by having a uh straight line roof uh roof line is uh moved uh further down uh towards the road uh just at the minimum height which is 7 ft uh we're also moving the adbox
uh towards the edge of the shelter structure uh which with the current bus shelter design really the headbox is somewhat under the shelter which reduces the the the coverage for passengers uh and we are also adding a glass panel on the opposite side of the ad boox so I'm
not sure whether that's very visible in here but on the opposite side of the shelter on the opposite side of the uh adbox there is um there is about 2 feet or so uh glass panel that provides uh then coverage from from three sides uh
for the passengers waiting under the bus shelter roof um uh in terms of materials uh really the main structure is uh made of uh made out of aluminum uh roof panels are uh uh tempered glass um there is also option for
polycarbonate uh wall panels are also tempered glass and uh uh Le lean bar uh and the bench are combination of uh aluminum and some rotto mod mold uh plastic um there is U if you wouldn't
mind U moving to slide number 10 or page number 10 uh so I think it's a one one more maybe yes so this is just a rendering uh of a nighttime uh this shelter is of a smaller size it's a 10t long and 7t wide
um and it shows passenger security lighting um and also advertisement display uh some of these um um uh shelters uh will uh have a digital ad box it's about 40 of them uh while remaining anywhere between 160 and
210 uh will have a static display um uh I'm not sure whether we can move ahead one more so this is just again slide that talks about the general General dimensions of this smaller bus shelter
again there there are a couple of more sizes one is 20 by3 and one is uh 10 by3 again for the areas of limited RightWay um so uh in terms of the the shelters obviously they will be uh installed on a Citywide uh level and most of them are
along state roads uh very few if any along residential uh areas um and some of them important to say most of them will have advertisement box but some of them might not in case we're unable to fit them within available right
away so I will uh turn it over to the board if you guys have any questions thank you m so uh we'll open it up to board questions I have just two um when I'm looking at the seating you know that that looks
like white or off-white and you know using public transportation myself a lot I don't know uh how easy that's going to be to keep clean where somebody might actually want to sit on it um so I'd like you to explain that and the other
thing is I see like on uh the bus pass um that some of these are on separate poles and not attached to the bus shelter itself and I'm really wondering why the last thing we need is something else stuck in the middle of a sidewalk I mean we see it all over all
over the place when somebody's trying to go by with a walker a wheelchair and there's something smack dab in the middle of the sidewalk I don't see any reason to do it that way those are my questions thank you and meas we'll go through all the board's questions and answer them all at once if that's okay thank
you Stuart so Ry mentioned the the I guess a kiosk for bus passes is is there going to be like an operational change where people are going to be required to have the pass before they get on the bus and they
would have to buy it at that kiosk and I'm wondering if there are other operation changes or potential operational changes that are um anticipated that these bus benches these these the facilities not the B VES this
the whole stops that that they would be able to accommodate uh other improvements in the efficiency of uh bus transit like like I'm thinking about B brt type of uh uh changes bus Rapid
Transit thanks St Barry hi um yeah I had some questions as as was mentioned about the benches uh noted them as like love seats um in in one of the images it looked to me like it was lighted and I just wanted to
clarify if it was lighted underneath I'm concerned about its bulkiness it's prone to vandalism graffiti gra gouging and such and has this been used this this design method been used in other um
cities I I don't think I've seen them I'm actually working on with a Transit Authority in Toledo with with something and and none of that was was proposed to us the other thing was um will there be charging stations in
here because I see there's electricity will there be any sort of charging stations um and and it's been I guess it's been clarified here that there will be live
updates for um um for the buses because in the information I saw here it said it can and so I wanted to really make sure that it will and then lastly are there
um um considerations for for the Blind and and that's it Laura uh thank you for the presentation um love the trolley I use it all the time um I do Echo the concerns about the Ben and just the long-term maintenance if you guys studied any sort of pattern
or or artwork as opposed to the white um it will get very dirty and over time in a short amount of time and also any rain consideration it it seems to be pretty high and um I know I've gotten stuck under those before in the
ring thank you um so my question M by the way it's great to see you you've been here a long time now thank you very much than um appreciate all you do for our city um so my question has to do with the existing inventory you mentioned that there were a lot of areas where there
were no bus shelters at all and I'm curious to know what the roll out plan would be with these is the idea to First cover those areas where there are no shelters or is it just to to remove the existing ones and replace them all I'm
just curious if if there's a plan of of how this all rolls out thank you absolutely thank you so we'll start from left uh so when it comes to the color of the seating we are very much mindful of the the color that we are currently presenting in here and we're working
with the outfront media and uh we will um absolutely uh look into the color that would be uh the best fit in here so that we reduce any potential for vandalism or uh graffiti and um make sure that um obviously uh we have a very
robust maintenance plan without from media which also includes the performance penalties in the contract in case uh that we see shelters whether they're existing or the future uh that are not being properly maintained but uh we do not want to use a color that would uh affect um adversely the cleanliness
of the VAB so we are mindful of the color um when it comes to bus uh um ETA estimated time of arrival that was Mr brin's Question uh and the Standalone we only wanted to use um and show that this sign can be a standalone sign as well uh
in case there is no bus Shel uh but really if we do have a bus shelter the stop it would be incorporated and made part of the design of the shelter rather than a standalone as we are very mindful of the sign pollution the reason I as that question is you show it separate
from the bus station right in front of the jacket please you know so that's why I questioned it if you're saying it's in that the case it's going to be at the bus shelter and I understand that was the reason I brought it up it clearly was not
thank you as far as the seats go as far as the seats go if uh um are there like holes for water to run through I I couldn't really see that from the picture yes we will make sure that as part of the design there is a proper drainage from the seats
okay um uh Mr Reed uh I believe that there is I just wanted to clarify that the the bus pass uh is really estimated time of arrival uh of the buses sign which is digital or like a Kindle type of device which just shows to passengers
waiting on the bus what the estimated time of arrival of the bus on a route that serves that bus stop is so it might be one route or it might be multiple routes uh really uh we believe it this would be very beneficial we have a lot of uh tourists that are coming out of
the country and they do not have a Self Service uh so it's important for them to know and rely on public transit service and uh just to in increase reliability of Transit service we want to make sure that that information is uh provided and out there uh in terms of other
efficiencies um uh there is a I know that you are most likely aware there is a better bus Network which is a complete redesign of the entire Miami dat County Transit Network um and U that redesign uh was adopted by the board of County Commission it was approved also by our
city commission um so everyone was briefed everyone is aware and uh the the betters Network should be implemented within a year or so um and U it really improves the service frequency of the routes that are coming to and through the city as well as uh connection of
those routes within the mainland so uh we we're really expecting much higher ridership of the regional routes uh in terms of the local routes um we our trolley service currently operates at little reduced service schedule as compared to pre pandemic but uh through
budget enhancement we are securing additional funding to start operating a higher level of service from October 1st of this year so it would be about 20 minutes as compared to the existing 30 minutes uh so really in order to promote Transit service we have to focus on both
improving the quality of Transit service imp improving service frequency and reliability and the bus stops or bus stops features of the bus stops um so hopefully that answers that question yeah so so there are no kios options for
noos okay so I miss her because I didn't see it I thought you mentioned it called oh okay so correct there are no chaos we are not doing anything about a fair uh obviously we're are not charging any fair county does have a fair for for
their Transit uh uh service but um our bus shelters do not affect that fair um in terms of uh vandalism from I'm sorry I'm sorry did you have a question no that's I think you answered my question thank you very much uh Mr clan
in terms of vandalism and and the caller again uh when it comes to the caller we will explore all Coler options as I previously mentioned in my response to Mr bring uh vandalism uh again out front media is uh really good about the maintenance uh we actually are working
very closely uh with them and uh anytime we have to engage our even Police Department uh to help them out when they go around the city performing their ongoing maintenance uh they're already doing so uh so that we also can identify High hotspots and provide proper
coverage from the standpoint of uh any support from the city or from out from media um for the for the charging stations uh charging stations were originally explored as part of the aay and Pinar design however we are not proceeding with any charging stations uh
just because um uh we we have realized that uh it might attract some undesired um behavior of the bus stops um and my my uh simply affect the clanless and uh my um resulting congregation uh and
using a bus stop for a purpose that a bus stop is not intended for um there was one more question which was uh blind considerations uh so uh as part of the estimated time of arrival there will be audio announcement uh of the uh estimated time of arrival of the
of the bus uh so a a person manually pushes a button or something it might be either manual or automatic we're still exploring but the Ada will be addressed as part of the adaa sign okay and the other I'm sorry but the other question I asked you about
the benches was were these used are these used successfully in other cities so in um to answer that question really our bu shelter design is really um uh something that we have developed uh in here so uh we uh used the design that
was previously approved by by the city commission drb and hbb and we fed I'm sorry but specific speically I'm talking about those like plastic benches MH uh so in terms of the the material um and and the shape uh it's a custom design
whether this type of uh you know looking around the country or County and the country um you know there there are really various options uh for for the seating and uh I would have to really see where similar design is uh used but I will tell you in terms of the size of
the uh the seat uh one of the functions that the seat also does its houses or provides a storage for the battery that is needed for to operate either lighting or or the ad box uh at night uh for those that won be uh won't be hard wired
so uh we can look into design of the seeds but uh they're also again being used as storage so that there is no separate and apart box in addition to the bench or itself um so um Miss uh Laura you had a
question regarding the long-term maintenance um and uh I believe height of the of the bus shelter uh so the existing shelters are a bit higher or the roof is about eight plus feet from the ground uh so really what we're trying to do in here and also they have
a monolithic roof and uh really it has a pitch points which are actually even higher than 8 ft so uh even me standing there the the roof is really uh far apart from from me and it doesn't provide uh great coverage so as part of the design we're moving that roof line
down to 7 ft which is absolute minimum uh so it's obviously like a on a rainy day we we don't uh hold our umbrellas couple of feet above our head so we want to make sure that U that the height is U as low as possible um and in terms of
and also we're installing this side glass panel as well which the current bus shelters do not have uh so that's other level of uh protection and in terms of long-term maintenance really the agreement with out front media is for uh 20 years uh and uh we we have
there there is a there are maintenance standards and expectations that we have in there including also performance penalties we do inspections of the bus stops and shelters and uh we report any deficiencies to them and they're actually responsible and uh obligated to
provide monthly reports uh in terms of Maintenance uh and uh in terms of the roll out uh so really the goal is to uh first fill out the Gap in terms of the roll out of the new shelters so we have about uh 100 bus stops um uh 300 bus stops but only 100 bus shelters so once
design is approved and we start manufacturing uh shelters and are ready to start installation we would first fill out the Gap install shelters where we don't have them and then uh we would be removing uh the existing shelters and replacing with the with the new ones thank you my pleasure shut those
off like a pro another question right just what what is the time frame like let's say there's an existing shelter you're going to be taking that one out still operating that as a as a bus stop while you're bringing another shelter in h how
is that going to yeah so happen how long yeah we want to make sure that we minimize any impact to the traveling public and passengers so we will try to minimize uh that time period between the removal of existing and installation of the new one obviously we wouldn't want to remove the existing before we have a
new one uh to be installed um removal of the shelter is a a bit complicated process because the existing shelters have a very large Foundation under the sidewalk it's about 2 ft uh deep 6 feet wide and as many as 20 ft long um and we
might not be able to use the the same Foundation that's still something that we have to I watched you remove one on Pine Tree Drive it took a very long time that's why I was wondering yep so but the bottom line and what's important for us and and everyone our residents and visitors in here is is that we minimize
that timeline between the removal and installation and that's uh something we'll be working with on uh without from Med I'm sorry I do have one other question um I think Ray brought brought to mind when about the kiosk being in
the middle of the sidewalk and it reminds me of the spot on 63rd Street with the light in the middle of the sidewalk just west of Allison Island on the North side with the black lines on the wall from all the bicycle handlebar is hitting it
um is there a minimum distance when you're deciding whether to use a shelter or not is there a minimum distance that you're allowing for pedestrians to go either behind it or in front of it absolutely so we have to be in process
of not only designing but but by but installing the shelters we have to comply with the Ada uh regulation and standards okay thank you thank you are there any disclosures by the way okay we'll open it up to public
comment now um anyone on Zoom wishing to speak please raise your hand see none anyone in Chambers wishing to speak thank you Matthew ganof with the Miami Design preservation League we appreciate the need for upgrading the bus shelters and we'd like to encourage
the ReUse of bus shelters which may still have a useful life in particular the mid-century inspired by shelters throughout the city also we would like to ask that a clear pedestrian path be kept at all
times around the shelters and the advertisement screens and lastly we're very proud that Miami Beach is among the most walkable bike and Transit friendly cities in the country thank you thank you
any other uh anyone else in the Chambers wishing to comment okay we'll close the public hearing and open it up to board comments anybody want to go first Barry well I think everything's um from from my perspective has pretty much been hit um
I'm in favor of this uh I would really like to encourage um some minimal level of charging stations um you know you may not want to encourage um people who don't have
access to electricity in your bus stops but you know do something for those people then so that they don't have to use your bus stops um but but the fact is they're there and need and need some assistance and don't have a home to to
charge them in so uh the minimum cost uh to the city I think would be uh a good thing to do thanks Barry Ray I'm sorry I don't agree with that I've seen you know like look at Collins Park you know they they
try to turn the electricity off in the park because you know the the you the homeless just hang out there in groups of twos and threes trying to use the outlets there sometimes they forget to turn them off sometimes they get broken that's the reason you have libraries and other places they will honestly turn
around and take over a bu shelter and and and use it and and if that's what we want that's fine but if that's not what you want then you don't put the charging stations in there any other comments R oh and I would agree with Matthew on
on on the current uh cement uh stations that bus stations you currently have uh is we those would be the last ones to replace do all the others first because of the amount of time and effort that you're going to be going through and the inconvenience that you're going to be
causing to everybody they would because they're working perfectly fine as they are now um this is just a change and as you and I both know we've been talking about changing the buff shelters way back from when I sat on on the parking and transportation committee and that
was four years ago yes thanks Ray Laura no comment thank you Stuart yeah one comment is I saw in the the uh application that there was a choice for
uh how uh dark the uh the covering is going to be because the the the permanent I guess shell has holes in it and then there would be uh a covering like a plexiglass that would be various
Shades I think that we should have the darker shades for the days that it's sunny so that people can be in the bus shelter without cooking Under the Sun and um I agree with comments about
the placement uh needs to make sure that pedestrian access on the the sidewalks is not impaired and um yeah I think that we could do a lot more with the bus transit services but I think that this is
definitely a an improvement if people can uh wait for a bus in the shade with shelter and know when the buses are coming I think it's a a step up so I support it thanks Stuart um so so my
comments um try try to be soft um because I I so appreciate everything you do Meo um and this is not personal I don't I'm not crazy about the design um it's really minimal um and I happen to love uh The
Masonry zigz zaggy bus stops that we have I think they're super cool I think the uh the brutalist bus stops in Miami which are kind of little by little disappearing or just fantastic um you know there's nothing wrong with these they're they're practically designed they seem like
they're cost effective um I don't think they're going to create an Instagram moment they're not really the same as our lifeguard stand even maybe though maybe somewhere down the road maybe our bus stops would be um
and and just with that in mind from what you said Milos there's there's a need for 300 stops you said roughly we have a 100 existing um I'm absolutely supportive of uh filling in the 200 gaps
with with these um but I'm I'm reluctant to support removing those super cool uh masonry structures um just for something that's it's so so I don't want to say it in an
insulting way because there's nothing wrong with these they're just utilitarian and not very high designed um and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that they serve a need um but but that's my feeling and I so appreciate all your work I've was here during the previous presentation so I know how long
you've been pushing this forward and I appreciate everything you do thank you thank you don't know if anyone wants to put a motion forward yeah I I'm move that we approve with staff recommendations and also that
uh locations that do not currently have bus shelters will be prioritized that they will first have the bus shelters built so that um they don't start off by removing bus
shelters where there's already in and and that there's a a time lapse there's a lot of locations where there are not bus shelters yet so I think the the the motion is that approve with staff conditions and that locations that
don't have bus shelters will obtain them first before any that are existing are replaced I'd like to make a friendly amendment to that that prior to removing the cement ones that you take another
look and maybe change your mind to keep them uh you know that that that just that you know since you're going to be doing the last you're going to get to analyze how well the bus stops that you have installed are working and maybe
you'll say let's just keep these I I I think leaving that option um is better for all of us because we do like the cement ones that are there and we also know the difficulty it is going to be to remove them and replace them would you accept it friendly I accept an amendment
that as where wherever possible that the existing shelters will stay and will not be removed but but that the other improvements will be um installed like the the time uh device and the the
bench and the leano that that all those will be installed at the existing shelters without any delay can I can I make a clarification so that's a motion in a second um so we are going to approve a staff's
conditions and the the locations that currently do not have shelters be prioritized for the Shel for the new shelters can we can we put to the greatest extent possible sure just
not CU I know this prac but there's 200 so may you know there may be an issue with one location and but we will we will do that to the greatest extent possible and then the other condition was prior to the removal of the existing
concrete structures that the city shall encourage reevaluate re-evaluate the retention of the existing concrete structures to be modified with current technology can can I ask a question I mean would it not be
possible just before the concrete ones start being removed that just come back to the board I mean if there's a need for 200 bus shelters that's plenty of work to be done and then to come back and maybe EV valuate where we are before we start wholesale removing them because
reconsider doesn't really mean anything if it's not going to a body that's prepared to consider I don't know what the exact phasing schedule is I think Milos could probably speak to the
technical difficulties or or considerations I should say with regard to the the schedule and the contract with outfront yes so uh outfront is um obligated to to develop this Design
Within 18 months which uh so far uh that's uh that's U that's on the schedule uh once once we do so really we're to start with the manufacturing installation um the the amendment or the
the the request to keep the existing shelters the way that I see it uh is that direction from the city commission was really to move forward the new design iconic design and to replace all the existing shelters with the new shelters um in terms of the existing
shelters obviously there would be certain improvements that we could make to them um I think at some point also we would have to look at the structural uh evaluation of those uh the the roofs are really heavy they're about 3,000 pounds
I believe each one of those sections and they're already 20 years out there uh that would be have to evaluate would have to be evaluated uh down the road and ultimately um just uh you know given the direction from the city commission to have uh you know one bu shelter
design out there in the field uh you know I don't know if we would have to go back to City commission uh at that point of time thank you Milos um you you could another option for the board would be to approve them with the softer language
and then on a separate item uh make a recommendation to the mayor and City commission that they reconsider um removing all of the concrete structures that that's just an option
that's that's available about 100 and then there's a question how many of those are in historic districts I mean most what do you say it's your motion
right steuart my real con the first so Debbie's recommendation was that we move forward with the motion with raise Amendment and then maybe make a second recommendation to the city that
they reconsider the removal of the concrete bus shelters in additions and ultimately it falls under the commission's discretion sure I think that's what we're trying to accomplish now and I think if we're able to
communicate to the commission that the HPB values the current designed shelters and would like to retain them if possible I think there's no problem with us uh communicating one motion or does it need to be two I would do two
separate motions um and then I will transmit that um um this week to the commission if if it passes and my main reason for doing is I know the disruption that's going to come to take out one of those old ones and bring in a new one and when you're looking at those 100 bus stops it's
going to be total chaos whether you're doing them one by one or doing three or four at a time and if we don't have to do that and we can maintain what we have I think it's better for all of us okay so let me call the role Miss Weinstein Burman yes
Mr Reed yes Mr kleene Mr Breslin Mr Pascal yes okay approved thank you thank you very much um and now we can take up the the second part of of the discussion which is to
make a recommendation to the mayor and City commission um that they strongly consider retaining the existing folded roof folded concrete roof bus shelters to re-evaluate to re-evaluate um the possibility of of retaining them
of keeping them while integrating while integrating the new technology and while installing spots where they're needed correct and having the new ones be where there are currently no shelters that would be my motion I guess okay great do
we have a second okay all those in favor I okay so we will make that recommendation uh we will transmit that later this week thank you thank you very muchos well done okay our final regular application
of the day is HPB 22531 this is 8645 Harding Avenue an application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the design of a new city of Miami Beach entry marker at the intersection of
Harding Avenue and 87th Street um this is also one of those City projects that has been around for a very long time um this was part of the north beach master plan this this concept of of creating this um signage into the
entry into our Northern entrance um staff has met with the architect Alan it's great to see you it's been a while since you've been before the board yes um and we're we're very happy with the design Direction which has been inspired by uh post-war
modern architect tal features um it's very specific to their locations to to North Beach um we do think it's a dignified entrance that will uh identify uh people coming into the city through North Beach um and we're extremely
supportive we are recommending approval um with the conditions in our draft order and with that I can turn it over to Mr shman thank you and Colette Satchel from the capital Improvement projects office is also here she is the project manager for this and she's also
available for any questions thank you thanks Debbie um good afternoon I haven't been sworn in yet sure um do you swear that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth all truth nothing but the truth I do thank you thanks good
afternoon I'm Alan Schulman uh architect founding uh partner principal of schan and Associates and our offices are at 7300 bisc Boulevard and um we're here today to um bring to you one of two entrance markers that have been designed
for North Beach this has been a long project we started the project in 2014 uh and uh eventually through a a number of stages of process where we've gotten to the point where we're before you and uh we're also working with the
dot to finalize um some of the design issues as well so um perhaps we could bring up the presentation and I also just wanted to say that we're working with Capital Improvements projects uh with Colette satchel and
she's here also to answer any questions um okay so this is I mentioned there were two projects um this is our team uh our Prime is also uh structural engineer Douglas wood and uh we're working with Barry Miller from Savino
Miller our landscape architect and then Schulman and Associates with the design design of the Pavilion so there are two entrances one is at the entrance to North Beach from the causeway on 71st Street and the other one is um where as you're coming
south on Harding at 86th Street or 87th Street um if you can go to the next image that was perfect this um so you know in thinking about
what would make a sign for Miami Beach uh I guess coming at this as Architects we um we trying to find the language of the city itself as opposed to let's say a monument that just had the words on it right and so we were looking at uh
Traditions that are truly Miami Beach uh and one of the Traditions that we hit upon as a kind of an inspiration for the project is the idea of the The Pavilion or the Folly let's say concrete Folly um there are many of them all around the
city um on the left hand side you can see the uh the the Foles the that Morris Lapidus built in 1960 when the road was mauled um they were circular group of circular ones but in fact he designed a whole series of such concrete Foles up
and down the road many of which uh still exist uh some of them have holes in the roof some of them are more solid some of them our geometric next image so these kind of uh fols could be
used also as port casares in front of U hotels or as Pavilions like the one that Rufus Nims designed for Howard Johnson um in North Beach um or uh the ones that Norman Giller built at the North Beach Bandell so this is a
language that's not just it's a Miami Beach language but it's also a North Beach language uh with lots of precedent around um but then we kind of worked with it in a contemporary way the other thing I wanted to point out here is the idea of the kind of Sky signage which has also
been a tradition in Miami Beach the kind of oversized uh backlit signs that U you see here at the shelborne OR at the Delo but they existed on on many maybe most uh post-war hotels next
image and one other tradition that I don't have a slide to show you um but it's the idea that landscape is often built into architecture that there's a meshing of landscape in architecture and so um we wanted very much to to make um
elements of the landscape sort of work with this um piece which would be an a marker to the uh to to the North Beach uh area now in this drawing you see our our plan at ground level so in solid
line below is a kind of a raised platform 2 feet high that um is um that that would be um landscaped underneath would be fully uh landscaped and then below would be landscaped around filling
out the island and then above held on columns would be the um the actual roof uh which has uh perforations that allow Landscaping trees to grow through actually this is the one I wanted to show you for context that is in Normandy
aisle so this is on its own Island let's say uh and this was approved last week at drb next next image and just to show you so this is a diagram of how that works and next image and this is what that looks like
coming into the beach um there's an idea that the color is used on the columns which I'll come back to in a moment and next image and then these things are designed also for um night which you'll see in the nor in
the uh Harding example so here we are um we are um actually in um the historic district um and we are right at the top there um outlined in magenta next
image this is actually a lot unlike the Normandy site which is part of the street um so here is here are some views of what this looks like as you're coming towards it it's it's right now a kind of a mass of vegetation uh there was a sign here at
one point this is a difficult traffic uh moment where traffic sometimes runs off the road and so um uh you know we've been working with DOT to kind of establish um standard for how that's dealt with uh next image we're up against an
apartment building building so it's the same idea of a kind of a meibo element uh floating on that lot which is a very small lot um it's uh it's hard up against the alley which is on the east side to the
left uh you see there are two columns that are carrying the roof next image and that is the roof plate with the uh perforations the apertures that allow the trees to go through and next
image there would be two colors here used on those columns and they generally have a kind of a c and Sky Motif uh the letters themselves would be um Channel letters backlit so again in
the language of Miami Beach hotels and next image so again a diagram the signage would be on top of the retaining wall that's holding that kind of raised landscape area next image there are some trees
that would be preserved on the site we preserve as many trees as we can or re or relocate them um this is a landscape plan by uh Sabino Miller next uh next drawing or next
image and um this is a day image of what that would look like um and you can see that the trees growing through um uh sorted growing through the canopy next image and a night View at night the
signage would be back lit the columns would be uplit and the bottom of the canopy would be lit and I believe that concludes my presentation um I did see yesterday comments by mdpl and I have some thoughts about those but maybe I should
wait for them to discuss them first thank you thank you very much uh we'll move to uh to questions and Mr shman we'll have all the board ask all their questions and take them all at once if that's okay
sure okay um way back in the Geo Bond of 1999 um Street ends from like 24th Street to 42nd Street had signs at the end with letters like that that's the 24th 25th or whatever and they've all
been broken off and stolen and my concern is you know uh vandalism that can happen to this sign and with it being rear lit um you know at night what does it look like from the other side because don't forget you have a street
coming on on both sides right so it's uh first of all stainless steel uh these are stainless steel boxes um and um I should say stainless steel or aluminum we haven't made a final specification but they're generally stainless steel having installed them at home hotels um they
would be hotels are up on the roof yeah yeah they're up usually on it's not easy for somebody to go up and grab them and bend them and whatever that so that's my concern let's just uh go through all the questions first and because you'll probably get different variations maybe similar questions if we could just go
through steuart yeah I had a similar concern about repairs not only vandalism but if a car runs into it um how how long would it take if the are are these custom made elements or things that would easily be
easily to be replaced should I any let's go through all the questions first any the questions um I like the design a lot um I like the design a lot the perforated top such and uh it seems like 20 years
ago meeting and working on something with Joyce Meyers in the planning department um on this exact site on on Harding and there was also discussion which when I saw it immediately reminded me of so like you say you worked on this
a long time it was 20 years ago this was popping around yeah there was a sign that never occurred that I thought was really cool was up the the bridge the Eastern bridge on 395 that was Miami Beach spelt out out
down the center and so that's what immediately popped in my mind um so I had some questions and you you as answered one about the letters but um it seemed in the images at least very bright and I was concerned about
that you know like with the neighbors right there at that that one building um and the uh reading on the landscape the I think the Palms are double lit they they have uh two rings of light so I didn't
know are they both under are they up and down I don't know and I know it's not your concern but I am concerned um maintenance like it came up earlier you know the city so you guys don't have to maintain
it but are you putting that thought process into that that it's not going to you know fall apart uh I did have and I wish Barry was here um questions of the fakahatchee I mean
it's a it's a a harsh environment out there for one but that that uh the one up on Harding and being under under that shade I wonder if it's gonna how well it's
going to do and is and is there irrigation so that that was another thing for question for maintenance but I but perhaps somebody from Savina Miller is on berries on Zoom so when we get to question concerned about the the
fakahatchee I've had difficulty growing it in under trees so um so that's it like it a lot I I think it's fantastic um it it reminds me of Miami Beach without you
know the letters saying Miami Beach just the structure itself um my only question was um on the roof is that one poured piece and like how does the rebar work in there because there are quite few holes and it seems like a pretty big span but other than that it's beautiful
you thank you for being here and thanks for the presentation um I I've been a part of this discussion since the beginning with the Canever over Normandy and the whole and also you know I live what six blocks
from here and was around when our original sign got hit by a car and we've had no sign since um and so a couple of questions I have uh have to do with that because this is a difficult location not
only is it difficult for traffic uh it's very busy anyway and it's kind of represented here properly in in the image with the power lines and the alley coming together and the the curve signs um and so one of my questions has
to do with um how you're addressing those issues um does this design is it differ from Normandy uh I'm concerned about you know a car hitting the sign and then we end up with no sign again or a broken sign
um uh those are those are my questions okay well um in terms of um I guess the protection of the sign um we are working with do right now there's what's happening in their right away and then there's what's happening on the lot so
what is happening on the lot is that the side this whole thing is built up on top of a concrete pedestal or a wrapping concrete wall so that wall will I believe serve to um you know isolate it
from uh things that are you know that that might crash into it uh to some extent I mean you know a huge impact would of course um probably destroy the W but um anyway that's the that was a request of fdot uh was to build this
thing up on top of a um let's say a a barrier um there is a question about whether the face of the barrier needs to be straight or has to be angled per their standards um but I'm not sure we're still working with do on on some
of those answers but so the first answer is that it's up on that pedestal um the other um there was a related question about vandalism um and uh I mean we that's something we can consider in the
specification to make sure that these things are locked into they're heavy they're going to be heavy duty um and heavy gauge heavy gauge yeah uh steel they're not it's not like a and they're and they're big you know they're four foot high they'll be heavy um and
they'll be of course um electrified as well so um we hadn't um cons you know we hadn't considered the possibility that people would take them but of course it's a possibility and and we should plan for that and and I don't know if that means that the Anchorage is so we
need to work with the company that makes the sign they would be oneoff signs right I mean they're made to a certain size a certain number of letters Etc so they would be uh specially ordered from a sign company this is not uh
proprietary work that only one company can do or there's a lot of companies that can do it but it probably takes some time to manufacture it so if it was hit uh and had to be replaced there would probably be some time between when it you know but I don't know how much time that would be um regarding the
structure um yeah the canal levers are a challenging um as you were mentioning when when we started the canal levers actually we had the idea that the canal levers would actually come out over the road in some way um but do immediately kind of said that's not that's not a
doable proposition so we pulled them back but um they will be um there are there are lines of Steel inside they will look like concrete they will look like concrete um slabs with um uh with
apertures cut in them but they will have some I think there may be tubes that are located along the lines that is one of the reasons that the concrete columns are staggered and are turned uh which is to stabilize the structure and to
provide lines above for uh for the structure to tie back um and um I don't know if I hit all the questions and perhaps if Barry's online he might want to talk about the takahachi and pl yes Barry Miller
sorry right can you guys hear me um 87 maybe should we let Barry speak and then I can come back to the question hi hi Barry do you swear the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth all truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you so um I'm looking at the screen now I see is my name the um I think let's get rid of the some of some of the questions the uh irrigation there will be irrigation on this there's no plan
submitted as of yet that's going to be for construction documents but uh uh the entire Island will be irrigated um on these lighting I think uh Barry Klein asked about the the lighting or someone did about we do have
a lighting plan proposed with low voltage lighting that would be up lighting the the P sable palms uh that's very easy to maintain and not not costly whatsoever uh there is a chance we could
remove REM those if possible because there will be some light bleeding through the the holes as well uh from the uh the L down below um in terms of pahache grass we you can't really specify
anything uh that's that's tougher and and easier uh toh to maintain does not require any pruning except for once or twice a year they wack it back U the also we combine that with a beach creeper
uh and a uh uh what's the last one we used was the oh silver Sal Palm Meadow just big clumps of silver salt met coat so these are the landscape was designed for very very very resilient and easy uh
maintenance so um we even had some airplants thrown into the uh for the Sable B for booted sa BS and salt tolerant questions I think they were everything is very salt tolerant
yes salt and wind tolerant so then if I understood the the lights on the on the palms were just for the crowns I guess they would be exactly yeah okay I that's what I didn't under so I didn't see the the the lights on
the drawing just saw them spe thanks and something else came to mind the space underneath the uh canopy is there going to be like open space there where people could put out
sleeping bags and get Shelter From the Sun where it's just going to be an attractive place for for people to camp out so um you know in the development of this when we started the project we thought of these um as places where
people could go to to kind of experience what that was like that space was like but uh in the development with City Public Works uh Dot it quickly became clear that um that would be you know we don't want to attract people to these uh places and
that it's actually dangerous uh for them to get there so um we have made it entirely let's say inaccessible I mean it's not fenced off but it's um you have that raised platform everything underneath that platform is landscaped everything at the ground level is
landscaped the roof has aperture so it's not cover from the rain or anything like that uh it lets the rain come through so so and it's a heavily trafficked those are heavily trafficked intersections so I don't think they would be an attractive place um to
gather um of course you know people can do all kinds of things so so the the the potential negative uh parts are are that that I thought about the um if there's vandalism or if there's an accident one
way I think potential to consider to avoid vandalism and damage by accidents is instead of having it on the ground maybe if it could be up at the level of the the shade structure so where people couldn't
reach it without a ladder to because I I understand from both Barry and and Ry that once there's damage or or maybe it was Kirk once there's damage or vandalism that these they're they're gone so as nice as it was as much as we
we come to appreciate it we want to avoid vandalism and damage so um that is something I was going to ask you we we tested it out on top of the canopy and I believe it's a little because it's small canopy it's
not a huge intersection I think it became a little topheavy but what we were thinking of doing was Raising it up to be higher underneath the canopy instead of on the ground and one of the reasons we were looking to do that is that um you know D and uh
was a question I had meant to ask you as well um is that dot hasn't come back with their full you know and it's going to be I don't know how much time before they do their full review but they also have some things some markings that have to go in so we want to make sure that the signage is out of the way of those
markings um and any other signalization that they're you know planning to install so um perhaps what we could do is raise it higher underneath the canopy um so that it's not you know hunkered down low but raised and maybe that could
be part of the strategy of Anchorage too like perhaps it could be anchored could be anchored maybe from the top for instance as opposed to Anchored from the bottom I don't know or both or both yeah your cement wall basically is is the same
thing as guardrail I mean it's going to be two two feet tall you know and you could go to 2 and 1/2 ft then for sure it's a guardrail uh you know somebody hits it and the other thing is which I know mdpl brought up and I had it on my list too
so we may as well hit it now is the fact it just says Miami Beach that's like a mile marker it should say welcome to Miami Beach or Miami Beach welcomes you and maybe that could be put on the wall you have Miami Beach may be on the wall underneath it says welcomes you you know
something like that to really welcome the visitor to Miami Beach that's all thank you yeah it's possible that we could raise that base uh up a bit higher I mean uh for instance what's not shown there is that there's a kind of a well maybe it's shown in that rendering but
um there's a metal uh guard rail that is in that location uh you know there we want to definitely be above that metal guard rail and this is so I was going to ask that in any motion that you give us some latitude to work with staff to finalize some of these dimensions and
Heights and things like that um I I would really hope that it um you know the the signage at LAX doesn't say welcome to LAX um you know where you are and um I
think we're kind of past that and I think you know the sign is clean it's modern it's contextual and not something I would I would endorse could we uh get us to the public
hearing and then I think we're sort of segueing into board no no no I just want to make sure we cover all the bases any disclosures by the way no disclosures and can we open up the public hearing if there's anyone onone on Zoom please raise your hand I see none anyone in
Chambers please come forward Matthew ganof with the Miami Design preservation League we appreciate the overall concept behind the design aesthetic however the setting of The location makes it challenging to design
something compatible and contextual we believe in the following should be considered one adding welcome to which would be more in line with other entry signs around the city perhaps it could be added to the canopy
above and two providing alternate font options that may be more mid century friendly we are confident that with some additional study and refinement this can be an even more compatible entryway to the north beach myo District thank you
thank you anybody else okay we will close the public hearing and move to uh board would you like to provide a rebuttal yeah um well I kind of uh about
the welcome too I agree with Barry on this one like I um I'm hoping that the idea of this thing you know as this strong architectural statement that really ties into so much of the city's
identity with the name of the city would be enough of a marker of where you are um I almost think it could work without Miami Beach listed there because where what other city in the world would do something like that as an entrance right I would have something like that so but
um I think it's important also to to to you know most people maybe not familiar with the architecture when they arrive and so I think it's good to to mix it but I'm not sure you need the welcome to regarding the font size um but but if if you all decided uh to go and you know
that that was a direction we could make it work uh regarding the um font it's true it's not a mid-century font but it's also not literally a mid-century structure it's it's a mid-century inspired structure right the shape of it the waggly shapee ape the the openings
that allow the Landscaping to go through those are all also contemporary elements and this the font that we picked is the city's font it's basically that yeah yeah it's that one uh right so it's uh you know it's a font that's used um all
over Miami Beach in signage and it was a a connective thing we didn't we didn't explore an alternative to that but I think it works quite well because it is modern it's not specifically mid-century font but it's a modern font that works well with the
architecture so um those are my only two comments thank you so uh board board comments just said I I would I would I just I feel strongly I don't think it
needs anything other than Miami Beach and I would be fine if the letters are attached to the wall or if the letters hung from from pipes from above um prefer them on on a
wall but I I think I think it's a very cool um design I think it become iconic and I and I would hope that it kind of evolves it's it's uh could be our new uh lifeguard
stance thank you I agree and and anchoring it to the wall I think will uh be the least uh vandalized ized in in a case like that but I do believe you should raise the wall higher to 2 and 1/2 ft just to make sure that you're
well above the guard rail not just like right at that you want to make sure that that shows all the way around that it doesn't look like it hides behind it okay and other than that I think I I'll I'll withdraw my comment about the welcome too I I I'll accept uh other
people's uh feeling on that I like the way it looks uh we were discussing about whether to raise it or hang it just in order to protect it and if anybody has
any comments or suggestions that might be able to uh fortify it and protect it in some way I think because I I would hate to see that go in and then a car crashes into it and then when is it going to be
repaired and I hope we have insurance for for that too but it's not only about finding you know paying for it but but getting it done if these are things that are custommade and uh if they are then I would prefer it to be uh further Out Of Reach of a of a
vehicle or a vandal okay motion can I I have a comment if I could um and I'm I'm serving as chair so I'm going last but I have really strong feelings um this is uh a really
important historic district to me um it's where I live it's a a historic district that I advocated to even exist um and uh I mean I have a couple of concerns I'm just hoping maybe um
everyone could consider one is Is For Real the the the idea of Cl accidents and vandalism because seriously we've been for about a decade without a sign and this is how things happen in the city is a car accident the sign's gone
it's not a part of a Capital Improvements plan to to replace the situation and so if it could be avoided um I think it would be great to to try everything we could to avoid that from even being a consideration I think it's
a great design it's fun um you know I respect your work and I'm so happy that that you were brought on board to do this and that you've stuck stuck it out all this time with do
um yeah my uh the other thing going to what um a couple of other points uh to what mdpl said I mean I do think that it's a little true that actually it's more than a little true the Miami Beach font is not really exuberant it's not
really fun um the NorthShore historic district is fun I mean the buildings in the NorthShore or historic district they're like fun houses and so um I'm not sure if it would be worth considering maybe either you know
elevating it uh maybe a different font I don't know why we can't be fun I don't know why you know just because it is Miami Beach and it's Miami Beach's font it's also the NorthShore historic district I think there's every every possible argument could be made uh to
make it fun and it's really just the Miami Beach part that's that's not very fun um the font and lastly uh is the fact that it's by Design because of the complications with the site it's busy um
you have the little arrow signs you have the electric columns you have you know the roadway of the wall protecting uh protecting the sign itself and with that in mind I'm also wondering because by virtue of their placement the
Miami Beach and the arrows are competing with each other and they're creating a sense of chaos which really has nothing to do with your design but the whole idea of uh less is more with mid-century design is sort of creating these
Whimsical open feelings and and it's kind of it's kind of a killer that you know you have the power lines and the arrows and the street and the Cobra light you know all hanging over this and so I'm wondering and and I spent a lot
of time on this because I think it's important it's really important to me that this sign um does its best to to represent that area uh you know I spent a lot of time actually looking I looked at like the uh you know the Palm Beach City Hall for instance which I think is
connected you know sort of in terms of the inspiration um and on that this the the the city of Palm Springs is is sort of elevated right it's up doesn't need to be gigantic it's just there and I'm wondering if maybe we don't play with
that a little bit so we don't have the chaos of the competing Miami Beach letters with the arrows you know maybe there's a way with fdot if the Miami Beach were elevated that maybe it wouldn't compete with those other
elements would maybe create more of a space of openness um I don't know I just put it out there for consideration again I'm I'm so happy with the work you've done so far on this I just feel like maybe those components I'm concerned about the
Miami Beach part where it's placed um I think maybe just a little bit of I mean you're you're the expert I know you're an expert you know the you're the perfect one for this job but I think maybe somehow it could be placed in a way where it doesn't feel so chaotic
which is not the fault of the project itself it's the location he said he was going to locate those in in in accordance with coordinating the final F dot uh for their requirements because he hasn't he hasn't received their input
yet so they may say oh we need a higher guard rail a lower guard rail no guard rail this that I think we might be able to sort them layered hor vertically in other words that the signage for um dot
is going to be at one level and that our signage will be above our signage would definitely be above that um and um I mean you're right it's a really crowded place there it just that's what it is you know I my first instinct when
I saw the project was well when when we talked about that site was wow there's there's so much happening here and and also you have the cars speeding right towards it right so like how do you how about you've got right now
you've got it attached on the bottom at the wall what if you attached it from the bottom of the of the top then it's still connected by same amount of basically same amount of space you know so that they're secure but it's up
higher it's harder for people to get to it easier to read and that might be exactly what what you're referring to I I don't I think the floating letters might be more mid-century anyway but again I mean you teach
this yeah so I mean I think it's about keeping things uh independent of each other like the stuff that's belongs to the road is going to be in the road that's dot stuff and we're not going to be able to do anything about that stuff uh our stuff
is going to be within the lot and it's going to be staggered so that as you see it uh they don't compete with each other literally on top of each other you know I I you're right that there're still going to be the signs and the other sign and you know but um I
think we can sort it out um in vertical layering so that they're so that they're clear and it may mean hanging it um or it may mean just floating it in between the two canopies it may mean raising the top of the canopy a little bit higher just to kind of allow space analyze at that point you
do it that way that's too easy to vandalize you're saying it's Tong because you're hanging in between so there's ways to be able to grab things and and pull them off when they're fully attached they're fully attached yeah yeah so I think um I mean my feeling
about how to keep it strongly attached is to Anchor to the ground through some very Stout you know uh I don't know steel behind it or something like that so I think it I think that could work um so I'm not sure I'm answer you know one thing we did
look at was um you know we looked at putting the signage on top but it looks very heavy it looks like a crown like you know the British crown or something like that it's kind of like uh and then we looked at also The
Columns extending through and sort of having py like pylons with signage on them uh but I don't think it would be very visible uh like that um so I think as a statement unto itself and also as a
connection to the Normandy aisle it's better to keep it consistent um even if it's not the ideal um situation and we're going to work with uh and do is working to you know make sure that the traffic side of it works um and that
cars don't come into it um so I don't know if that's going to mean some change of the of the metal guard rail that's below or or anything else but I mean I think my vote would be to elevate it I think it's less inclined to be
vandalized it's less inclined to be hit by cars and I think it's more reflective of uh the the myo Spirit anyway to be floating um also Normandy is not a local historic
district this is so if we need to be different we deserve to be right since there's a lot of things that still have to be ironed out with fot I would make a motion to continue this till we have final say what what fop is going to make you do well fop is going to be a long
process I I if you want my opinion I think that we could could put a really good condition in that I've kind of while you're talking I'm trying to record your your comments that the the final placement of the sign shall be
further explored and adjusted as needed to avoid visual conflict with f dot um Street Furniture in signage as well as physical con physical damage from
vehicles or vandals perfect you're good with words I'll make that motion try to listen so I'm listening to your these are your words I'm just transcribing them perfect I'll make that motion okay do we have a second second
okay um let me call the role Miss Weinstein Burman yes Mr Klein M Mr Reed yes Mr brezlin Mr Pascal yes thank you all thank you thank you okay so we have one final item which is
just a discussion item today regarding an ordinance um that we would like your recommendation on for the CD3 zoning District specific to the museum historic district um this proposed amendment um
would modify the rooftop addition regulations So currently in the museum historic district existing buildings are permitted to have uh on story rooftop addition the amendment would propose to
amend that to allow for multistory rooftop additions on non-contributing buildings up to a maximum height of 80 feet the the overall underlying zoning District allows for a height of 50 fet
so this would be in for for rooftop additions on non-contributing buildings this would allow the height of a multi-story rooftop Edition to exceed that 50 ft up to a maximum of 80 ft um this was reviewed by the city's
planning board at the July meeting I believe the planning board has transmitted an unfavorable recommendation to the city commission the city commission is scheduled to review this ordinance tomorrow um at the at the commission meeting at first reading we would like
to be able to uh transmit a recommendation to the commission verbally during the presentation of this item tomorrow um can you explain the uh the reasoning behind why this applies to non-contributing buildings versus
contributing and and what is the incentive well this this is a proposal by a private entity um and I think they're probably better um at explaining why they crafted the ordinance and and
are recommending that the city commission consider this um for a particular project so I I could turn it over to Michael Arin who could kind of explain the history and why this was is being proposed um and what the rationale was
behind it sure sure thank you so uh could you please pull the presentation hopefully ah so good afternoon everyone Michael Lin T South bisc Boulevard here representing Shan bardy he is the president of thank properties the
majority owner 2000 Collins Avenue it's one of the three properties that would be covered under the scope of this legislation I'm also joined here by Jennifer McAn the project architect and my colleague David butter as Debbie described you while we're here to discuss a proposed amendment to the
rooftop addition regulations the impetus behind the legislation was Mr vard desire to add more Hotel units and a food and beverage venue for his guest only his hotel guest it won't be open to the general public commissioner Christen Rosen Gonzalez has graciously agreed to be our sponsor for this legislation but
the beginning she said it had to be a dual referral not only going to land use but going to the store preservation board as well to to get their input uh next slide that's just how the ordinance looks um at the very bottom is the actual language it says not withstanding
the forway provisions of subsection 142 1161 D2 existing non-contributing buildings located with the museum historic district with a lot line and Collins Avenue may be permitted to have a multi rooftop addition not to exceed a maximum building have 80 feet so to answer your question Mr
chairman when I draft legislation I try to be more narrow my Approach and if I had it apply to every property in the museum of s that'd be too much so I try to limit it and when I'm looking at different filters to limit it one filter could be
non-contributing buildings because when you do a rooftop addition to contributing building it's a much bigger deal you know there's a lot more you could be disruptive and a noning building is arguably built much more recent so they could withstand the additional load that would come from a
multi Ser roof help Edition whereas in historic building it'd have to really put in more much more support columns to to sustain a multi store rooftop Edition that was my thought I was trying to narrow the scope of the legislation and only have really apply to non-contributing buildings uh next
slide so as Debbie mentioned uh existing structures within Museum local store District are printed to have a single story habitable rooftop Edition now we're proposing multi- story rooftop editions not to exceed a maximum Building height of 80 ft again only applicable to non-contributing
properties with a lot line on Collins Avenue and located in museum local historic district next slide this gives you all uh understanding of the scope of the ordinance the properties that would be included in the
scope have a yellow boundary on the South Side there's a nonfunctioning robotic garage um that Russell tried to get years ago to work and it never has work it just never has worked um so it's non-contributing though it was a vacant
lot and this garage was built so it would be there it's right next to a multif family building that's 19 stories in height so I don't think there's an issue of compatibility there to the north of it the doorchester hotel but it's separated by a 50 foot area where
there's a parking area and a pool so it's not really right on top of the doorchester either if you go up to our property we're almost the whole block the South Beach Hotel is the notch that's outside of that but Shan vard's group also owns that South Beach Hotel
this was one of my very first project in Miami Beach it used to be where Wolfies was located here at this particular Corner the 5:00 Club was the strip club there all the buildings were deemed non-contributing at the time so the whole block was allowed to be demolished at the same time and its place was now a
mixed use building with ground floor restaurant retail above you have residential units and then the parking garage is located on uh 20th Street there's also multiple Hotel units there hint in the Bulan hotel next
slide this is just an aerial giving you the boundaries would be 21st Street on the North 20th on the South Collins on the East and Liberty Avenue on the west where sweet Liberty is you may know it's a great cocktail bar that's in that
area next slide this is a view if you're looking at Collins and 20th just looking to the Northwest if you see the parking garage area that is where this proposed uh rooftop Edition will go as you can see it's really recessed from view you
can't really see it at all from Collins and 20th next slide an aerial view looking to the north it's the pool deck that is at 68 fet in height as Jennifer is going to describe to you we're going to have Hotel units underneath the pool deck and
the pool deck will be extended to the west to account for that food and beverage venue I just described to you all next slide this is a view showing that you have towers of all different heights in the surrounding area so if we would increase our height from 68 to 80 feet
it certainly is not going to be negatively impacting based upon this built context in this area next slide this is the rounded Corner this garage I don't know if you all know Marcus Frankle but even before the other part of the project was built I did this
garage with him back in 1999 2000 and Marcus is a great architect and uh for the longest time though the the retail area and the ground floor remain unoccupied but thankfully F sweet Liberty moved in a few years ago and it's been a smashing success but that's the view that you'll see from Liberty
Avenue and 20 Street looking to the Northeast now I'm going to have Jennifer mccan take over because this is not my design it's hers and she's going to walk you through the next few pages good afternoon everybody Jennifer mccan with Studio MCG
architecture next slide so on the the only work that we're doing here that that we're proposing on the Balan is just on the left side of the screen right now that portion of the building is occupied by by cars it's a
it's a garage but it's an underutilized garage um so that top floor we would turn into hotel rooms the right side of the building actually is already located at is 68 feet tall so we're adding a an
addition at the level below the pool deck uh that has about 20 guest rooms and then on the second level of the addition we which we step back and it becomes smaller um we have a just a a
lounge and food and beverage area for the hotel guests as well as we're able to extend the pool deck a little bit right now when you go up there the pool deck is very small and cramped it is it's it's you know it's a sizable hotel but they really do need a little bit
more room room up there to breathe um so again just uh we're continuing the 68t height with the first level and then just an additional 12 feet of the this the second level of the addition on the left next
slide this is a view i u Michael showed you before what it looks like now we respected um Architects the original Architects curves of the building and we also we stepped the building back and curved it as well next
slide this is a view from this is with the addition and there's really not much of a difference I think you just see that staircase on the left side coming up another level that's the only change um from Collins Avenue that you're really going to see next
slide and here this is what the section looks like now there's an existing large cooling tower on the roof which is in the middle of that that roof along with car and then we have the retail mechanical
also right below the pole deck so what we're going to be doing is taking that large cooling tower replacing it moving it over towards the other equipment that's there adjacent and lower than the pole and then building the addition on top next
slide and there you can see what the difference is you you see how the pull deck matches up to the new restaurant uh for for hotel guest only next slide and then here you can see the difference between which is level six on
the left is what's existing and there's it's full of Tandem triple tandem cars that you know we've we've been up there a few times and there's really no cars up there um and then on the right is what we're proposing 20 hotel rooms with that white area in the center notched
out for mechanical so that mechanical systems won't be going up on the roof making it even taller we've located that at a lower level where there's where there's already mechanical systems and a high parit so you won't even see it next
slide and this is the floor with the the the extension of the pull deck in yellow you can see the new floor area um that's been added next slide that's that's it thank you
Jennifer and just Mr chairman if I could have Mr vardy just come up give a couple of minutes and that would be it thank you very much sure hello everyone um it's been a long time since I've been up here I uh a little bit about me I came down here in
um in or yeah 2010 and 11 and I started cutting my teeth uh on this block actually I was a condo salesperson for this building now my uh group and myself own the building and 2013 we were most known for purchasing the Plymouth hotel
which was something that almost cost me my life but uh we um we're about four and a half years in construction went through the historic preservation board and all the challenges when doing construction for historic building um but we stuck with it and even with the
cost overruns you know I kind of looked the board in the eye and I said guys I'm really here to do what I believe you know the board intended you know bring it back that nost and you know kind of have that Timeless moment and not um take advantage of a
situation um I then came after building the asset uh and and you know we added a rooftop addition to it we then came back in front of you and requested uh in the rm2 neighborhood to have Outside Music which was not allowed and then the board granted us that and to date you know
that was about four years ago we still have never had an issue um with our neighbors or anyone in the neighborhood um I bring this up because today we are now about 600 700 employees we have about a thousand rooms
uh that we own and manage within the city of Miami Beach and we hold our hat up high as being one of the better operators um we have restaurants named Blue Ribbon we have restaurants named Orange Blossom we have restaurants called lemonada uh none of them that you would see in the news but stuff that you would you
know probably take notice of of the the type of consumers that come to Miami Beach and just today um which is one of the reasons why we know we're proposing this um David Whitaker just uh appointed us on the board of the gmcvb
the why that's important and this was the reason why we went for the uh the variant or to have the outside noise for the Plymouth was that we were getting a tremendous amount of Group business uh from the convention center and while the hotels on the sand were kind of getting
a little bit price pricey you know the boutique side which is kind of the infield that I kind of refer to we were kind of the go-to area for these groups and as a result we probably do 10x of any other group combined uh off the sand
so we were awarded the nomination to be on the board but part of that is having space for some of these groups to kingle have a group meeting and what have you and as you aware these hotels these boutique hotels are very limited on that
the proposed idea for the rooftop um and that addition is not necessarily for a restaurant it's actually we will while we will have a food and beverage component to it and it's really only for our guests it's primarily really for the meeting space that we need in order to kind of house some of the group business
that we have so again very happy very proud you know love what we did we kind of are one of the I don't know I think we're probably the biggest largest uh group in the neighborhood um and and I think it's important to take note of some of the things that we said and more
importantly the things that we've done um since then in taking this into consideration for the request thank you thank you that's it Mr chairman I'll Retreat to my chair now you can have your
deliberations we uh it's a discussion item so okay so we can open it up simultaneously to questions just so you know I've known Sean since 2011 and he everything he says is correct to add some substance to his
request um if you look at the cows Park neighborhood originally Miami City Ballet could only be built to 50 ft the library could only be built to 50 feet and all of a sudden when we got ready to build the garage um we said Gee right across the
street you can build 75 ft and right on 23rd Street an old building in the 1930s is 84 ft tall so we got you know the cins Park neighborhood association said hey look we can build the same siiz
Garage on two lots instead of three lots go to 75 ft and now all of a sudden behind the library there's another building that's going to be built that will be Workforce housing and dorms from Miami City Ballet that's 75 ft so that's just right across the park from where
you're where um Sean ver is talking about this variance so um I think when you look at everything that's in the neighborhood that this is now out of range for that I do have a question for uh Michael you said there's a total of
three properties that would be able to do this what are the other two sorry I was tired um getting back to that slide so the first one I described was a
robotic garage at the southern end right that's right so you all right the second one is our project that 2,000 Collins and the third is directly across from the W Hotel it's a rectangular building that's non-contributing directly behind
it is a two-story building where there's a restaurant the ground floor yoga studio above the the Mi Beach Library is on the southern half if you go beyond the two-story building you have affordable housing for seniors and then you have the 75 foot building you're
talking about Workforce housing so you're talking about ler sector's building on the corner 202nd and counts okay thank you I just need that clarification because it's not going to be something that it's going to happen you know all over um so you know I I
just wanted to have everybody have an idea of the entire neighborhood and what's going on because no nobody knows that neighborhood better than I thank you Barry steuart okay sure
thanks so part um subpart D2 of section 142-151 it says existing structures within a historic district shall only be
permitted to have habitable one-story roof additions and the amendment which is in part seven it says not with standing the foregoing provisions of the section I just read existing non-contributing buildings located
within the Museum District may be permitted to have a multi-story rooftop addition not to exceed a maximum Building height of 80 feet I heard there was discussion about activating it for a restaurant for example it you didn't say that I thought I
heard the word restaurant what not not to the public okay well open to the public or not a restaurant I don't know if the amendment does anything to uh modify the
requirement in that part two that the structure that's permitted as a rooftop addition must be a habitable structure so so I don't I don't know if the amendment would he's adding rooms he's adding rooms why why is everybody
saying he's asking questions to the applic yeah sorry everybody always has an answer in the middle of while I'm talking I don't get it sorry so so that's one thing is that um it appears to me that the
amendment will allow an increase in height but not a change in the the what's permitted as a rooftop addition which would be a habitable structure and then my other question is that as the way the code is
written right now it mentions twice once in that subpart D2 no variance from this provision shall be granted and then at the subpart 8f no variance from the provisions of 14211 161d shall be
granted so this code specifies twice there's not going to be any variances and I guess that since there's no variances is what why we're here today that they're looking to amend it what was the
rationale be behind not allowing variances from that uh uh rooftop addition I mean is is is this amendment now being unfair to the people who
drafted this code in the first place that they're allowing rooftop addition so long as there's no variance from this provision but now we're giving particular property a carve out by by Amendment and I don't know that that that's why I'm asking what was the
purpose for the no variance language to begin with I wasn't around I didn't hear the discussions but it seems to me that what they're trying to accomplish now is to go around the people who may have carefully drafted Ed this this code in the first
place Barry thank you I I agree with much of what Stuart says and uh I feel this is uh a change in Zoning for a particular property owner um who he may be a very nice guy we've never met um
and you may do wonderful things but by your own admission you said um you said you made a statement that this is not to add rooms uh or rest or or you specific uses other than some some meeting rooms
conference rooms why not use some of the unavailable unused parking for that and renovate that and let that be your new use I don't see the validity the the purpose of
changing the zoning that was you know carefully carefully um written um for for the people's use not just an individuals and so won't I won't uh back
it La uh thank you for the presentation and uh the Plymouth is an amazing property I uh commend you on I'm sure that was a lot of lot of Blood Sweat and Tears um
my my concern is just in gen I I love the design in my eyes Jennifer can really do no wrong but unfortunately you know when designing the code we can't specify you know who who is going to be the future owner um the future
ramifications of this um sort of kind of comprehensive in in my mind um zoning Amendment and I guess you know my my question really to the Commissioners is you know I understand the contextuality of the height going from 68 to 80 feet
is not a big deal but I really wish that the city would look comprehensively at some sort of public benefit program that would allow this you know someone to pay in like an owner to pay into a fund um rather than just giving kind of these
spot zoning and it it is I mean we're talking about three properties here that are kind kind of getting special treatment which I'm all for I'm all for like increasing height if it helps a property but I really wish that the city would look into to a more comprehensive
plan rather than um just looking at individual districts and I know it's not um you know your your issue but this is just a a public statement and discussion Point thank you um thank you for for the
presentation and for all the work you put into it um my feelings mirror a lot of what what Laura said and and it's it's interesting because I was um earlier today mentioning to Debbie about
the Collins Park Hotel project and the rooftop addition that was added on to it and obviously you know I'm I'm always thinking about other historic districts and and you know we talk about this a lot about
incentivizing uh the retention and reinvestment in historic buildings and add in sea level rise and you know it's a nuanced discussion um and I think it's an important one and and and I do want to point out that Collins Park project
because I think it's so beautifully and compatibly done the addition to a two-story structure and the addition is three stories two ground level Edition I know Jennifer worked on that project five stories five stories jennif and and I mean it was be
beautifully done uh Kudos on that and and I think it's a perfect model um but getting back to this discussion um it does feel like spot zoning a uh B um I want to
incentivize um you know the the investment in historic structures not necessarily you know the non-contributing structure first and foremost um that's my focus and if if we're going to be raising Heights I
think for historic structures is as as Jennifer has shown us it can be done in a very compatible and beautiful way um and I understand Mr Lark and what you were doing in terms of trying to carve out and and to avoid any unintended
consequences and yet at the same time I feel like uh comprehensive planning discussions need to keep happening in this city and if there's a justification for increasing height anywhere in a historic district that it should be a
comprehensive discussion that includes what the impact would be on not only non-contributing structures but also the contributing structures and ideally how um we optimize the benefits for the buildings and for the people living
there so um I mean I you know again I I I think the uh the project you designed is beautiful I'm just I feel like our approach should be done in a compatible way and and and it's my feeling that that's the message we should be sending
to the commission with regard to um the historic districts and and maybe down the road that would include making a project like this possible but I think it should be addressed in a comprehens ensive way with uh massing studies and
and both contributing and non-contributing buildings in mind thank you for the presentation can can we have a motion just so we can transmit to the commission tomorrow is anyone open to making a motion it's either a favorable or
unfavorable recommendation would make an unfavorable motion to to the item um to not change the zoning okay very good do we have a second I'll second it okay all those in
favor I any opposed one okay so that's a 4: one unfavorable recommendation to transmit to the city commiss for your time apprciate thank you okay members of the board that
concludes our meeting if there's nothing else we can adjourn okay enjoy your the rest of your afternoon evening see you in a month