to uh tell instruct people how they can participate and then we'll go through kind of the order of operations here. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh good morning members of the board, members of the public. Today's meeting of the historic preservation board will be conducted in a hybrid format with the board
physically present in the commission chambers at Miami Beach City Hall and applicant, staff, and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. To participate in today's meeting via Zoom, the public may dial 1888-475-4499
and enter the webinar ID which is 81748347488 pound or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 817-48347488. If you wish to speak on an item, please click the raise hand icon if you are using the Zoom app or dial star9 if
you're participating by phone. If you're appearing on behalf of a business, a corporation, or another person, including as an architect, attorney, or representative of an applicant or an objector, you need to register as a lobbyist with the city clerk's office before you speak to the board. If you haven't registered yet, you should
register prior to appearing. You do not have to register as a lobbyist if you're speaking only on behalf of yourself and not any other party or if you're 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 are communicating. These rules apply whether you're appearing in favor of or against an item or encouraging or arguing against its passage, defeat, modification, or continuence. Um, I would now like to swear in any members of the public or staff who will be providing testimony
today. Please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Nick. So, as far as the order of operations, um for each item that we call, um the staff will present
the item uh and describe their recommendations to the board. Uh the board will then be permitted to ask questions of staff uh to understand the recommendations. Uh the applicant will then make their presentation. Uh the board will have questions for the applicant most likely. Um, ideally if we
can take all the questions and uh together and then answer them all in one rather than a back and forth, that typically works a little bit better. Um, and then um applicant response uh and then has a seat and then we'll do board disclosures and then we'll open the
public hearing. Um, we'll permit rebuttal to the extent that um the applicant desires or it's necessary. Um, and then we will take our votes. So, uh, with that, uh, Debbie, I we have our approval of minutes.
>> Um, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, just wanted to let everyone know it's I'm filling in for Michael Balouch today. It's a it's a privilege um and honor to be with you um through the agenda this morning. Um, yes, the first order of business is the approval of the June 9th
um minutes. Does anyone have any edits or we can entertain a motion to approve? I move to approve. >> Okay. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Approved. Um, Madam Chair, we also have a couple requests for continuances
this morning. Um, and I'll just go right into that. The first application is HPB 26685. These this is an application for the citywide uh digital information kiosks. I know the board is is familiar with
these. You've seen several of them um over the past couple years. Um this one in particular is located at Espanola Way and Drexel Avenue. Um the other two that are part of this this application were actually approved previously um back in
April. Um the applicant is currently um still refining um this particular location and is requesting a continuance to a future meeting. Matt, we will need a a date certain. So if you could maybe explain to the board when uh you feel
like you will be able to come back. >> Sure. Thank you. Uh Matt Amster loft at Burke Howard Fernandez Larkin and Tapeness offices at 200 South Biscane Boulevard in Miami here representing Ike smart city LLC. Uh as Debbie and good to see you here and congratulations on your
new role. Um we um took three application uh three locations to you all in April. Um there was concern both at staff level as well as uh the nearby you know stakeholders at that Espanola way and the commission did approve for
both Espanola way as a corridor and Washington as part of that that um that three package uh location deal. So, we got two of them approved on Washington and uh the team has been looking at not just Espanol Way, but also the nearby
Washington areas to see if we can find another suitable location for this. Uh it's taking a little longer, but we want to make sure everybody's on board. So, we wish to continue to the October 13th meeting to give us time to finish up discussions, find a location, and then
we will have to submit plans to staff to review and get to you all. So October 13th, if we could please >> and staff has no objection to that. >> I'd make a motion uh to uh approve the continuence till October 13th.
>> Second. >> I'll second the motion. >> Okay. All those in favor? >> I >> I Okay, that we will see you back in October. >> Thank you all very much. >> Our the next application requesting a continuence is HPB250670.
This is third eight, excuse me, 1835 Michigan Avenue. Um, this particular application is specific to a variance for the seaw wall. Um, the applicant is requesting a continuence to the November 10th uh meeting and staff has no
objection to that. We have been meeting um with the property owner and um have you know we've expressed some concerns about the the variance given the condition of the property during high impact flooding events. Um and so we
have no objection to the request for continuence. Is the applicant here today? Um, let me see if you're on Zoom representing 1835 Michigan, please raise your hand. Um, Madam Chair, I do not see anyone
representing this particular application. >> Mr. Director, >> yes, >> this matter has uh been uh presented to us uh several times. It appears has has the uh
property owner made any uh done any remediation to uh mitigate the flooding concerns? >> Not that I am aware of. Um Jazelle, has Michael, do you know if Michael had met with the property? I think he said he had met with them. I just don't know if
any remediation work has occurred. Yeah, my understanding is that they wanted to continue to the November um agenda just to make sure that you know I know there was discussion regarding the kingside to see if there's a inspection
so that hopefully um given that it doesn't flood that's something that they wanted to at least uh report in our staff report. So they wanted to wait until November since there was concerns about you know in King's Tide with the seaw wall. Well, that is when king ties
>> over. Is there a limit to how many continuence requests? >> Um, the maximum number of days an application can be continued at a single time is 120 days. The maximum life of an
application is is 12 months or one calendar year. So, um, you know, this particular application is nearing the end of its life. It was originally presented to the board on in November of 2025. Therefore, the latest it can be
continued out before the application would just become void is the November 10th HPV meeting. >> Is is there currently a notice of violation or fines acrewing? >> There was a notice of violation for
repair work done um to the seaw wall without a permit. That's really how we found out about this. Um the property owner was uh hired someone to make some very minor repairs to the seaw wall that triggers the
height requirements for the seaw wall. So when you're making a repair depending on the extent of the repair and the cost of the repair um it it requires some elevation of the seaw wall. again the the the amount of height elevation of
the seaw wall is contingent upon the actual scope of your repairs. So we had met with the property owner again this goes back over a year ago um to give them their their options and they they chose to request a
variance to not be required to elevate the seaw wall. So what happens if that application expires and so they go back to the violation and they have to do the rem the necessary remediation. >> Correct. So the violation would not
become um closed until a permit was issued um for the repairing the seaw wall >> and so the permit absent the variance would need to be at the higher seaw wall height. >> Correct. And so that would be the only
resolution to the var. So either they get a variance at the lower height or they don't get a variance and they have to get a building permit at the the code department. >> So what mechanisms does the city have to force violations?
>> Well, we do issue fines. Um we you know for building violations specifically for work without a permit you know we can issue unsafe structures violations. This is this is unique because it's a seaw wall. So typically when we see work without a permit in an unsafe structures
violation being an issue, it the the remedy for that in in most cases is demolition. Well, we wouldn't want and you know we wouldn't be okay with the seaw wall being demolished is because someone went in and repaired it without any authorization. Um, you know, our
goal is for the property to come into compliance to receive all of the required permits for the seaw wall repair, whether that's with a variance or at, you know, eliminate the variance and actually come in with a revised
permit to show the the elevation and height. >> Um, I also wanted to note that it appears their last violation was in October in 2025. Um, so we haven't received at least on record um any recent violations.
>> Okay. >> Do we have any further questions or a motion? >> I'll make the motion to uh continue this till November 10th. >> Okay. All those in favor? >> I
>> and that was raised on November. I think the motion was on for October meeting. They're requesting for November 10th, 2026. >> That was my motion. >> Yeah, the motion was November 10th. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Um the next application is HPB 0690. This is um 280 to 300 Southshore Drive. This is an application for a certificate of appropriateness for the construction of a senior housing project.
Specifically, this is a a modification requesting a front setback variance in corresponding modification of a condition of the prior approval to permit an asbuilt uh FPNL uh transformer in the required front yard. So, I'm
going to turn it over to Jazelle, who will give you some more uh specifics. >> Sure. So, um on June 14, 2022, the historic preservation board did approve a certificate appropriateness for the construction of an elderly housing
project um on a vacant site. It included variances from the minimum setbacks and waiverss. Uh subsequently, the applicant did receive a full building permit for the construction. However, during the permitting process, um the FPL vault was relocated uh to comply with flood
requirements, FPL and Florida building code. As constructed, the FPL vault is 12 ft from the front property line where 25 ft is required. Um it is important to know that when they received the approval, they actually had a 22 foot
front setback variance that was granted to them. Um staff notes that in the waterfront properties that's in the national the northeast national register overlay um it is required to have that 25- ft uh setback in the front. Uh just
as a comparison in the non-waterfront lots it's usually 20 ft. Um however what we've noticed through some permit history regarding the adjacent properties it's actually more common that a lot of these properties sit at a 15t front setback. So the vault is actually a little bit more consistent
and in line to like the established developmental pattern. Um as the the applicant is requesting this variance for the front step back as well as amending a condition in the final order that does state that the FPL wall has to be enclosed within the building
envelope. Um right now as it sits it's not feasible to locate or relocate that FPL vos simply because that would mean demolishing the existing building as constructed that was already approved at HPB as well as they already received uh full building permit. Um however the
applicant is mitigating um in a way where they have a 6-ft wall as well as these clusia hedges just so that it's at least not visible from the pedestrian sidewalk. Um therefore we feel that based on these findings staff concludes that the request represents the minimum
variance necessary that won't negatively impact since not necessarily visible from the street view. Um we support the requested variance and the amendment to the final order. >> Yeah. Thank you Jazelle. If I could just add because I was very intimately
involved in uh when we had these projects. Um we have Vista and Breeze across the street. their their companion projects for elderly affordable housing. Um, you know, I think this is just a really great example for the city to see
how um affordable housing can be can integrate really creative and high quality design without um you know significant high-end uh costs. And I think that both of these projects uh were extremely successful in increasing
our housing stock while still being very creative and still really speaking to the character of the neighborhood in in North Beach, which is a, you know, predominantly post-war modern uh architectural style. So, I just wanted
to uh express the city's um you know, satisfaction of these two properties. Um, I believe, and I'll let the applicant speak, but we both projects have have received TCOs and I think they're fully uh leased and people are
um moving in and able to enjoy both of these properties. So, this is a real um success story from um my perspective, you know, as a planning director, but also from from my previous role as a historic preservation officer for the city. So, um with that, we can we can
turn it over to the applicant. Just do we have any questions for staff before the applicant? Go ahead. >> They need a vault in order to have the electrics. So you indicated
people have moved in. I'm a little concerned about that. How how does that work >> for staff? So either it it was in, you know, these were requirements of FPNL, you know, when when the uh project was under construction.
>> I don't I don't think it's a full vault. It's more of a transformer. So it's not one of these, you know, uh thousand square foot vault rooms. It's really just a transformer. And that has been installed. So FPNL required this. It's it's an after
the-act situation that we're dealing with here. >> Okay. I have one more question. >> Go ahead. Asc >> why was this now integrated into the original design process? >> So, and I'll let the the architect speak
to this. They they did include um this type of equipment that FPNL requires. However, during the construction process, FPNL um what I my experience is often requires different things. Um so what you think
is going to be the requirement during your design development phase and even potentially during the early construction phase of the project um can turn out to require changes once FPNL has issued a a final authorization to
power the the property. I've seen this happen on multiple occasions um where we go through or the applicant goes through an entire vetting process pre you know HPB and pre-building permit with FPNL and then somehow along the the line uh
the rules change and you know we've we've had several of these actually come to the historic preservation board over the years um that were in very similar situations >> and and not to go too far off the topic but like how how do improve that process
with FPL and I know I I was there when you had this exact almost this exact conversation the other day. So, I'm just curious. >> I'm hopeful. Um, you know, we've we've had contacts over the years and have had conversations with FPNL over the years, but I was recently at the chamber
chamber um speaking uh on behalf of of the planning department and I was I was given a contact information for one of the chamber members for FPNL. So, I'm hopeful um that we can continue our relationship and and actually have uh
more clarity um from staff's perspective so that we can better uh you know instruct our applicants. Um, but I think, you know, what we're going to do is going to continuously try to understand uh the FPNL process and
hopefully, you know, connect applicants and and avoid some of these situations in the future. >> Okay. Thank you. Elizabeth, did you have a question? >> No, that was my question. >> Okay, perfect. All right, so go ahead. Okay, good morning everyone. Cecilia Toto Acresman LLP offices at 98
Southeast 7th Street here on behalf of the applicant Bista Breeze Ltd as well as the Miami Beach Housing Authority. Stop did a fantastic job summarizing what the application is. So we'll have a very brief presentation understanding that not all of you were here in 2022
when this was approved. And it really is a very cool project and Jeffree is very passionate about it and it's a benefit to hear him talk about it. So, we do want to give you a very brief presentation. If you can bring that up, PJ. So, as staff mentioned, this was
approved back in 2022. It is an affordable housing project located on Normandy Isle, very close to the golf course. And one thing that's unique about this is that it presents an opportunity affordable elderly housing waterfront right in modern amenities,
which is something that, you know, people don't really get the benefit of often. Um, here you see a little bit better where the location is. And I will let Jeffree walk you through the project. One thing I do want to point out is that this is the most significant
investment in affordable housing for our elderly population in almost 50 years. Based on the data that I was able to review from the Miami Beach Housing Authority, the biggest affordable housing project for the elderly was built in 1979. It's the Rosemary Towers,
and those are about 400 units. In the in the almost 50 years that have passed since 1979, we've only been able to add about 60 more units. And the Vista and Breeze projects combined offer 119 affordable housing units for the
elderly. So, this really is the most significant project that we've done for our elderly population. And it's modern contemporary build. It's an opportunity for people who would otherwise be pi priced out of the city to continue to live in their communities and in a very
dignified matter. This is a very important project and I'm very proud to be representing them today. And with that, I will hand it over to Jeffrey to talk a little bit about the design. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, board members. Uh Jeff Huber, principal with Brooks Scarpa Huber Architects. I'm the
architect and the landscape architect of record on this project. Um, the building, you know, is is carefully thought about around all of its edges, around all the open spaces. I can get into a lot of the details, but we did work with FPL from day one to design
this. It's just the issues came about when the inspectors came on the site. Um, but um the building was was uh designed as a public private partnership as Cecilia mentioned and this is with the um the housing authority of the city of Miami Beach. So, it's providing 70
permanently affordable homes for elderly residents who are going to be able to remain in Miami Beach and invested in their community. So, the architectural uh character of this project really draws from that Miami modernism, from that post-war
modernism eras, as as Debbie mentioned. And this is a very prominent style along Southshore Drive. and its simple horizonal or horizontal massing, shaded openings, light colored surfaces, screens, and carefully proportioned volumes. It is contemporary but
intentionally grounded in the architectural character of North Beach. Every unit is designed for accessibility and long-term livability. The apartments include accessible bathrooms, kitchens, outdoor views, and the intent
is not to simply uh put or provide housing, but it's to provide homes for support, independence, comfort, and daily quality of life for the elderly population that lives in here. The shared spaces are designed for a social infrastructure as well. And so community
rooms, a business center, gathering areas, and other amenities create opportunities for residents to meet, remain engaged, and to access services. The stairs are prominently located uh in areas that are inviting where the
elevators are actually less visually dominant, and that's to encourage everyday movement and to inform a kind of social interaction uh that that does not compromise the accessibility of the project. These exterior spaces are also equally
important. These courtyards, shaded walkways, gardens, and seating areas create places for conversation, rests, and recreation. And the landscape includes drought tolerant, salt tolerant species, pollinator planting, and habitats for native flora. And these
spaces support both environmental performance as well as physical and mental well-being of the residents. So the project, you know, does advance a lot of the city's goals and I'm going to hand it back off to Cecilia to talk through those.
>> So to be to point out that this project directly implements some of the goals and policies in the city's comprehensive plan, which are encouraging the development of affordable housing. Other policies in your comprehensive plan also speak directly to providing housing to
our vulnerable populations in proximity to transit, which is exactly what this project is doing by bringing 70 affordable housing units here in Normandy with the sister project a total of 119. As I mentioned, this was already
approved by the historic preservation board. And as Debbie mentioned, it's not uncommon that projects come to you in a conceptual stage, right? And as we get into the permitting process and architects that start paying attention more intently to other codes such as
FEMA, FPL, and Florida building code, things shift around. And that's exactly what happened here. By the time the encroachment was detected, we were weeks away from TCO and relocation of the vault was simply not feasible without substantial demolition of this just build project, which would delay
delivery of these affordable housing units um a lot more. As staff also mentioned, Jazelle and Michael did some research on the asbuilt environment and reality is that although there is a 25 setback requirement for this property,
the abuing properties are built out at about 15 ft of setback. So our request for a 13 ft setback variance, which would put us at 12, is actually consistent with the asbuilt environment and will not negatively impact our neighbors. I will also mention that this
team went above and beyond to mitigate visual impacts of the FPL bolt. For example, FPL doesn't allow you to have plantings in front of the bolt that has to be accessible at all times. And Jeffrey was able to convince them to have low scale plantings in front of the
FPL bolt to kind of mitigate that visual impact. Of course, if FPL needs to access the bulk, that will need to be trimmed down and replanted, but it really does uh make it so that any potential negative impact is mitigated. Um, with that being said, we we ask that
you please approve this variance and we are available for any questions that the board may have. Do we have questions for the applicant? Okay. So, I have a question if no one else does. Um, you know, the statement
was made um by the time we realized it was already too late to fix it. Um, and talked about when the inspector showed up, that's when this So, to walk me through the process that brought us here, right? Like, why was this? Because if you're constantly in communication
with FPL, I'm trying to understand and you have a building permit that says you have a setback. How did this get constructed outside of that setback and no one C? Walk me through that if you will. Well, first when we went and came
to HPB in 2022 under the first certificate of appropriateness, we were already working with FPL's planning um and design teams to design the FPL transformer in the place and it was accepted at that time. Subsequently, numerous things happened
between FEMA, FPL, as well as um a few other things in and permitting process as well as through the construction process that ultimately kind of created this this challenge cuz we understood that this was a historic district and we wanted to go ahead and shield and
clearly um you know keep the the transformer behind kind of evidence. Well, they required us to kind of turn those walls um 90° and actually have that access to the street. And at that time, we were okay, still within compliance, but then FPL came out a
second time and asked that they did not want this transformer anywhere underneath the overhangs of that building, which was how we designed it to have the proper amount of height that was required, which was 14 ft um clear space. they still wanted it to be moved
um out further and that subsequently um was a tremendous amount of cost on the contractor and the development team um because we had already constructed it per what was um we didn't set the transformer yet. It wasn't powered on but we had constructed the walls and at that time that's when things started to
uh shift. We did um we were required to keep this transformer at the the the existing grade too which was a challenge. Um in this project we really did everything we could to make it as resilient as possible to future sea level rise as well as flood adaptation.
And so um it still has flood panels and that was one of the things we were able as Cecilia um mentioned to negotiate with FPL through this process towards right at the end. I mean the or the breezes transformer was actually one of the last elements that we constructed on
the site and so and that and and being it powered on. I mean we had the building essentially done with uh finishes and everything in the building before we actually powered the building on because of this transformer um constant issue where we were trying to work through it. But it was just the
challenge because it's not a regulation, it's a guideline. And I think that's the biggest problem in working with FPL is sometimes that the guideline, whoever is interpreting that can change over time. And so that's ultimately what this project fell into was an interpretation
request that was not going to be um relieved. >> Okay, that I mean that's informative to me. So So thank you. Um if we have no other questions for the applicant, do we have uh anybody who wants to speak on
this item in the public? I I see no one on Zoom to speak on this item. Anyone in the audience? >> I'd make a motion to approve the uh modifications and variance. >> Second. >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. All those in favor? >> I >> Good luck. It's a nice project. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. The Is my is my mic on? Can you? Okay. Um the next application is HPB
26694. This is 1015th Street, PNC Bank. An application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the proposed exterior facade improvements to an existing non-contributing commercial building within the Ocean Beach Historic
District, including the addition of a new architectural canopy at the primary entrance, updated building signage, fiber cement panel accent elements, and integrated architectural lighting and minor modifications to the entry vestibule. and I'm going to turn it over
to Jazelle for uh more detailed information. >> Hi, as Debbie mentioned, this application is limited to uh exterior facade improvements or non-contributing building that was constructed in 1995 in the Ocean Beach Historic District. Um
the proposed work includes the installation of a new canopy at the main entrance, the removal of the existing signage at the primary entrance, the installation of the fiber cement accent panels with integrated architectural lighting and modifications to the
existing entry vestibule uh the replacement of the existing door with a fixed glass panel to maintain uh the transparency at the storefront. Uh the interior improvements for the project was previously permitted and approved under a master permit as well as a revision and the work has commenced. The
applicant is proposing to remove the framing of the existing signage and replace the double entry doors. Um this is so that it matches the glass panel. It's a little bit more consistent. Uh the proposal introduces dark fiber cement vertical accent panels, the LED
lighting that's like an orange uh red uh accent and a helas canopy to match the fiber cement panels. Um it will be illuminated with 24 in uh sign letters uh some wall cones and a 4ft di uh diameter power link sign. Staff
recommends a phototric plan to be provided and that all the exterior accent lighting will be static and white with a color temperature of 3000K maximum in order to minimize the glare in the impacts around the surrounding area. Staff also recommends that the system be equipped with a program timer
uh that reduces the intensity during late uh hours and to be turned off all the decorative lighting by midnight. In summary, staff is supportive of the exterior design improvements on the subject site and recommends the approval and the conditions enumerated in the draft order.
>> Thank you, Joselle. And do we have any questions for staff from the board? >> Okay, go ahead. >> All right. Um, hello. My name is Adriana Alban. I'm a project manager and architect with RSNH. I'll be
representing PNC Bank and the landlord for this project. and I'll be presenting. I don't know if we have the presentation up and ready. >> Please use the laptop on your live. >> Okay. All right. So, this project is a PNC
bank. We're located in Miami Beach. It's about a 5,000q foot project um on 1015th Street, Sweet A, Miami Beach, Florida. The scope of work, as previously mentioned, is composed of repainting of the exterior, the addition of a 24-in
letter uh set sign and a powerlink sign and the addition of fiber cement panels with LED lighting. Um, as well as the addition of an entry canopy, replacement of and replacement of the vestibial door with a glass panel.
Within our letter of intent here, we explained um the summary that Jelle kind of went over a little bit earlier. Um, the project includes the proposal of an exterior facade improvement for the PNC Bank tenant space. Um, we are located
within the Ocean Beach Historic District. The existing building is a non-contributing commercial structure and the intent is for the proposed work uh is to rep refresh the tenant frontage and to improve the pedestrian entry experience while maintaining the
existing light white uh appearance of the building while introducing some durable and coordinated facade design elements um that are consistent with the PNC Bank brand and surrounding context. To recap again on that scope of work,
we're going to be removing the existing signage framing. We'll see that a little bit later on the exterior elevations that we have put together. We'll be repainting the exterior in the color white. We'll be adding new fiber cement accent panels along the vertical fins that we see throughout the building and
um proposing to add LED linear lighting um within that with the color orange um with which is consistent with the PNC branding. new exterior wall sconces and a new architectural um canopy at the primary entrance with updated PNC tenant
signage and um illuminated signage elements as well as the replacement of that ential door with the glass panel. Um it exclusions that are um here on this project. We're not going to be modifying anything in regards to the
building footprint, height, massing, site layout, the parking or any landscape areas. All of those are to remain unchanged. The interior tener improvements improvements are being addressed separately and are not part of these HPV
requests. We have included the per building permit number as well as the permit revision for that in here as well for reference. This is our sounding information here. The total square footage of this building is around 12,000 square foot. It's about 30 um feet high. We have
about 29 existing parking spaces which will not be um modified. As previously mentioned, we're within the Ocean Beach Historic District, a non-contributing building 1999 um and zoning CPS2.
And then we have some of the additional requested um information in there. I'm not going to go through it all, but this is our con context location plan. This is just a half mile radius um site plan here showing where our site is located
within the Miami Beach context. An existing aerial of the site. The orange block that you see there is the PNC lease space. This is our site plan here. Again, no changes are being proposed to the site
layout. Um the existing site plan will remain as is currently. Oops. Oops. Sorry. I don't know why that appeared there. That was our phototric plan. This our
existing floor plan um existing conditions um and demolition plan reflecting the approved permit layout. The interior work was uh previously permitted and is shown for reference on here. As previously mentioned, we are um
approved for this one. This one's currently in construction for the interior portion of the building as shown here. The existing exterior elevations um and scope here um the existing signage framing is to be removed. We're showing
that at the top of this um entry vestibial right here as recommended by the pre-application meeting for before the board. We'll be removing the existing double doors located here and be replacing that with the new
um glass pane. These are some current images of the interior of the space. That was before um construction started. Right here is our proposed plan. Again, there's not really any changes being proposed here. Just kind of reflecting
what has been permitted already. Some existing exterior images of the surrounding context just kind of showcasing here. So, how some of the surrounding buildings generally maintain that light or white primary facade and have some of those darker accent colors
and materials that are being used throughout the areas and the storefronts for these sites. Um, and just kind of showcasing how we are trying to mimic the same uh idea for the PNC bank within their brand colors.
These are some historic historical exterior images just to show um the progression of the building throughout the years. We see 2008, 2011, 2017, and 2022. On here, here are proposed exterior elevations.
Um on the south facade we see the addition of the um fiber cement panels in that dark charcoal color along the vertical existing fins there and then the integrated lighting in the orange color representative of the PNC um
typical marketing um logo and colors on there. And then we see the 24-in letter set on the new architectural canopy and the 4ft diameter power length signage on there as well.
Currently, as we have the this uh application submitted, we are proposing for those fins to go um to this side of the entry. If you guys can see my cursor, um, we had been recommended in
the past during our pre-application meeting to try and investigate the possibility of extending that treatment of the facade throughout the remainder of the building and we have discussed that with the landlord and he's agreed to let us do that. So, we do have
updated um, elevations and renderings that show the look of that so that the entire building can have a more more cohesive look. Right here, we included a detail of um what we would be doing within those
linear fins. Um adding that cladding detail and that um lighting within it and just some of the um material properties of the fiber cement panel that we'll be using here. We're going with a matte finish which minimizes the
glare and visibility wear. Um, this is ideal for high traffic pedestrian level applications, which is our case here. It's resistant to moisture, fading, raw insects, and fire. It's low maintenance and long-term performance. Um, the steel finish provides a modern aesthetic and
is consistent with the surrounding accent colors, and the stone block is inspired appearance with durability of the fiber cement. And then lastly, we have some exterior images here. This is our southeast corner
and what it looks like today. This is a daytime render view of what we are proposing in our current package. This is a nighttime view where we kind of see those LED that LED lighting um come to life a little bit more on the
building. This is a south view here. This is an existing exterior image of what it looks like today. Daytime render of what we're proposing with those vertical fins and the lighting, the canopy as well. And then a
nighttime render of what that would look like with the LED lighting as well. And lastly, we have included here that alternate option that I mentioned a little bit earlier. After having discussions with the landlord after we submitted this final um our final set
for the application, we did discuss with the landlord um extending the same treatment throughout the entire facade. He was amendable to that. So, we have included uh this alternative option here to extend that throughout the entire building to make it more cohesive. This
is the preferred option now. So, um, we ask that the board consider this as well. And we've included some exterior renderings of the daytime here of what that would look like if the, um, both sides had the same treatment.
And then we have our nighttime renderer here. And I'd like to welcome any questions or any comments that the board may have. Does the board have any question for half? Okay, go ahead.
>> Could you please explain a little bit? So, when you have the fins, it's kind of clear how you're wrapping it around, but where we have the staircases, how you are creating the illusion of a fin there. >> Yes, we have not. >> I'm sorry. And then I have one more
question. the black and the orange that you showed there, the surfaces will be painted on this colors or the orange is just the color of the light. >> It's just the color of the light for the orange. And then um in regards to the question about the vertical fin along the stairs, we have not fully developed
those details yet, but we would be creating some sort of ele elevated or raised detail that separates it from the building so that we can include that linear lighting behind those panels on there. We're still a little bit of a conceptual stage with it, but we can
certainly develop that further. >> Okay. And then the black will be painted black. >> The the black part is the nijiha fiber cement panels that will >> correct, but they will be dark. >> Yes, they will be a dark charcoal gray. >> Yeah, that's what I was trying to understand.
>> And we do have physical samples if the board would like to look at those that we have brought. Those are our fiber cement panels that we're proposing here. >> Yes. Yes. So the detail of that element on
the stair volume it's very important because since you don't have any surface separating the fin from the rest um it could be a deal breaker. Okay, we can develop that further. >> Elizabeth, do you have any more
questions? No, I just have a suggestion maybe that the fin instead of being only on the front to turn the corner too and then the light would be at the corner not on the sides like you show here if you want
if you follow me. >> Yes. Let me So if you see here in this rendering that I'm kind of showcasing right now on the vertical fins on the side of the entrance, we are putting those that LED light on the front face
of those fins and then the ones that are at the entry vestibule, they go off the side. So we that's the detail that we have to develop a little bit further. Um, but the the the fiber cement panels would be protruding a little bit forward and then those LED lights would come off
the sides. >> Right. So, what I would suggest is that when you have because I mean when you have this the slim fins, it's easy because you have a U-shape CL, right? So, when you get to the stair volume, you don't have anything protruding and you have to create that, right? So what
I would suggest instead of being only on one face let's say the face facing the street >> that you do perpendicular so it's a corner and the light is on the corner too so that the dark material turns around the corner so it has an end to it.
>> Okay we can consider that. >> Do we have any other questions for the applicant? >> No. And do we have anybody in the audience or on >> there any experte disclosures?
>> Do we have any disclosures? >> Okay. Um Madame Chair, we do have someone on Zoom with a phone number ending in 5600. Oh, I apologize. Uh we can take uh >> Go ahead, Meg. >> Good morning, board members. Um Meg Lust
with Miami Design Preservation League. Uh we concur with the staff recommendation. uh to approve the proposed modifications. The scope of work consists of relatively minor changes to the building facade, including updates to the branding, color palette, and the addition of limited signage on a non-contributing building.
As proposed, these modifications are appropriate in scale and character and are not expected to adversely affect the architectural integrity of this non-contributing structure. Thank you. >> Okay. Um moving to Zoom. The phone number ending in 5600,
please state your name. Hello. >> Hello. >> Please state your name. >> Hi, my name is Christina. Christina. >> Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes.
>> Thank you. You have two minutes. >> Good morning. My name is Christina Vega and I am representing cyber money laundering and real estate investigations corp. We are here to object application for PNC bank HPB
26-0694 due to fraudulent statements in the documents supporting this application which we discovered during our forensic analysis of the applicant documents and legal status. We are also submitting the petition for the injunction under the
bank security act to the US secretary of treasury or pnt banks tailor in having an efficient AML program. This board completely lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear or approve this application under Miami Beach land
development regulation section 2.1.1 and section 2.13.7. Uh an applicant must demonstrate an actual and land control and verified fe simple ownership of their subject property to establish stand. This
application contains fraudulent statements regarding the owner of the property. The building permit card for permit DC2526445 and the board agenda list items supporting the documents. Uh the owner
is listed totally as NF fifth street LLC street coin s e. However, the official warranty deed recorded in clerk's file 2008
RP2994 proves that the record title is held jointly by N Fifth SD LLC and B K fifth SD LLC as tenant in
common sit LLC is a legal Thank you. Your time has expired. >> Do we have anyone else on Zoom? >> No. >> Okay. And no one else in the audience. Um
do we have any board commentary? Do you have any rebuttal to >> So what they're saying is that we put the incorrect owner is I guess what they're referencing to. >> Go ahead, Nick.
>> Um to my knowledge, the the application is properly before the board and all of the um disclosure requirements in the code have been satisfied. >> Okay. Thank you, Nick. Thank you. >> I would make a motion to approve the design change that you have for this
building. Looks really nice. Did a nice job. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. Is this with the continuation of the fins throughout the facade of the building as presented today? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. So, that was a a motion and a second to approve. All those in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Okay. Great. Thank you, >> Madam Chair. On the previous application, I failed to ask for exparte
disclosures. I apologize. Did any board members have any disclosures to make on the prior application? No. >> No. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Your application was approved. >> Awesome. Um, and we will be sending you the the board's order. Uh, okay. In a
week or so. >> Perfect. And just to confirm, it was approved with for the entire >> Yes. Yes. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. Are we ready for the next one? >> I think so. >> Great. Um, the next application, HPB
2691, uh, 2100 and 2111 Collins Avenue. This is the Bass Museum of Art. An application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for proposed additions and site improvements to the Bass uh
Museum of Art campus, including the partial demolition of portions of the existing structure, demolition of the existing surface parking lot, construction of a new uh ground floor gallery building, the creation of a um
civic plaza, and an elevated outdoor gathering space. Um so we have outlined uh in your staff report the history of of the site. Um in the past 10 years you can see there have been incremental
uh expansions and improvements made uh to the property all of which has has come before the board uh in the past. Um the current proposal includes an in another addition. Um this
is to further expand the museum. There are also some exterior accessibility and streetscape improvements that are proposed um on the southwest portion of the campus. Um the proposal does include the removal of the existing surface
parking lot, the introduction of a new gallery building, um and uh the amenity air outdoor areas. So it's important to note that the uh existing uh original building which is the 1930 Russell Pan
Coast building is not proposed to be altered in any substantive way as part of this application. There are some minor um alterations proposed from the 1950 uh edition. Um however, those are limited to the
interior uh finished floor of the space. Um there are some minor adjustments that are being proposed for connectivity um of the different areas. Again, it's it's always a challenge when we have a building that's been added to over time because certain floor elevations can be
at different levels um and cause operational uh challenges for the for the museum. So, they are correcting some of that. Um there's also a proposed uh new entry point in the uh Isosaki
addition that was approved by this board in 2016. Um and staff has no objection to that. In general, staff is extremely supportive of this modest expansion. Um, and we are um we are at this point
recommending um a continuence only because we have been advised by the applicant that they are still looking at the the materials and they are still potentially at least at the time of writing this report potentially looking at some adjustments to the fenistration.
Um but we are supportive of the the current proposed plan and if they you know if the board feels comfortable delegating some of that to staff. We have um we have included a draft order with some draft recommended conditions.
Um but other than that we would also be pleased to bring this back with further details at your September meeting. Uh one last note the applicant is also requesting a waiver from this board. The Historic Preservation Board has the ability to approve loading space
waiverss when there is a contributing building on the site. In this particular instance, um obviously the the historic Bass Museum is a contributing building and they are required for the new addition one loading space. Given the configuration of the site, while they do
have street multiple street frontages, they don't have an alley. So they don't have any obvious back of house area that we would want to have a permanent loading space on the property. Um however they are um allowed to work with
the city's parking department to provide on street loading. Um and and staff is supportive of that waiver. So with that we are available for any questions you may have or I see um >> we have I think we have some board questions. Right. There is a loading
space on on 22nd Street for the Bass Museum. Wouldn't that count for this being added on as a separate? >> Correct. They can the the on street loading they can use. However, the code requires the loading to occur in the private
property, privately owned property. This is a city-owned property, but it's still city property. So the waiver comes in when you're saying, you know, when they're requesting to put it on street instead of in the in the property because it's new construction. That's
what is triggering the de loading requirement. But we're, you know, you know, the city has been very understanding when you're dealing with an existing site, um, especially when you have a contributing building that it can be very cumbersome sometimes to to
introduce loading spaces. And it's it's more appropriate and often in this case we believe it's more appropriate to have the loading on the street. >> Okay. >> Okay. Any further questions for staff? >> Okay. Did you want to make a presentation?
>> Yes. I just wanted to say hello. I'm Sylvia Carmen Covenia, executive director of the Bass, and I would like to thank the Historic Preservation Board for your consideration today. and we're extremely excited to be presenting this
um which we've worked on for so long and um and it's really part of the master plan of our expansion most recently with a rotunda on um Collins Park. So again very excited and I'd like to introduce our architect Sharon Johnston on Johnson
Markley and Associates. Thank you. >> Thank you Sylvia. Hello everyone. Thank you so much. Um I had a presentation is there a way to great thank you so much. So we today um honored to be here. Thank you for your time. Um we wanted to just
introduce you just to a few a bit of our work then talk about the history of the bass and how this project fits in to that lineage. Um Johnston Markley um is based in Los Angeles. We're also here with our team Baron Bon Bush here from Miami. Um I think just to highlight that
our work at at Johnston Markley is focused on the arts, new buildings, renovations, um spaces for arts education. So this building, this project for the bass very much fits into the lineage of our expertise and interest in um being here in Miami
Beach. Um the Manil Drawing Institute, a very similar climate and in a way a similar type of project, a museum in a park. This is a museum um on the site of the famous Renzo Piano building from 1987 in Houston, the Manil collection. And for us, I think the relevance here
is just thinking about how to make a publicly accessible building that very much integrates landscape inside and outside and is very accessible to the public. This building is also the drawing institute is is very accessible. It's a place for art. It's a place for gathering and learning and it's centered
around the integration of landscape. So gardens are central to how um we designed the building and I think are inspiring our work for the bass. Um another project in Basil, Switzerland and a historic building of the very same year as the Russell Pan Coast building.
So we're we're very comfortable working within the context of a historic buildings where we have we're renovating this building, adding gardens, cafes, similar programs, really thinking how the public can move through these buildings in a more contemporary way in terms of visitor services. um flow and
accessibility. We're also renovating this building and to bring it up to contemporary code. In Chicago, we worked on the Museum of Contemporary Art. Chicago very much follows the tradition of the Bass Museum in a park. Um this is a building from the mid 1980s, a German
architect, Joseph Paul Clyuse. Our project includes um expanding publicly accessible spaces like this artist commons connected to the park outside new circulation places for artists activation outside of traditional galleries.
Like this project we have worked on a master plan that reinvisions an expansion of the building making the base more transparent and accessible adding a wing um centered around a new winter garden. And we worked with the um the artist Chris Oily reimagining these
public spaces, working on color. Chris did a series of sightspecific murals um that we worked with him on in terms of integrating with the furniture. Um at a university campus in Los Angeles, Chapman University, we created and expanded a museum. It's called the
Hilbert Museum. It's at the edge of the campus. It's centered around a new courtyard that features this important mural from the artist Millard Sheets. So instead of adding square footage, we renovated these two buildings and the new entry is a garden courtyard much like the bass. It's a very mixeduse
space. It serves as the entry to these two wings as events, readings. It's also a path pass through space and it's fully open and free to to enter. For the Whitney Museum of Art in in New York, we renovated a former um the artist Roy
Lipenstein was his former studio. It was bequested to the museum and we made an artist studio addition. So working within historic Renick village district we transformed these spaces for artist studios. So very flexible and informal spaces and made an addition that just
for an artisan residence. Uh and this project also included making this building fully universally accessible. So I think access is a really central part of our work here at the bass. And lastly um the museum of contemporary art in Los Angeles also a building by Arajasaki.
We completed a master plan and addition proposal for this project. So I I wanted to highlight um the importance for us of Isosaki's work um and understanding the historic context of his thinking was very much generative of how we thought about this design. It like the bass has
a very important kind of civic space which is this courtyard and so the addition of new galleries really reinforces this public civic square at the center of the museum. So here is the bass. Um this is the image as we see the building today. Um just a little bit about the history of the bass. I think
hopefully everybody's familiar with Collins Park. It's really a museum in the park. Um Collins Park is about 10 acres and as Sylvia mentioned, I think the work that you all have been doing with the bass is really about imagining um new activations in the park. So the
rotunda was finished this year. Miami Mountain um Sylvia has a plan for a splash pad that will be coming in the future. So art in the park, art exists outside the walls of the bass already and also includes this beautiful Sylvie Flurry um neon sign eternity now. So
we're the project um we looked back at some of the historic visions that Arata Isosaki had when he originally planned this project and it was about a very simple building and a very specific way to activate the park with landscape and with artist pavilions. This was his
original um sort of revised proposal for the for the museum. And he really thought about these different generations of the museum from the traditional historic room to a much more modern kind of second generation museum which is what the bass is today. And in
Isuzaki's vision for the future um generations of art at the bass was really about very bespoke intimate ways that artists and audiences could come together and that is sort of the foundation of our vision. So if this was his original plan, this was what was realized basically half of that um
master plan. This was completed around 2001. Um so just a few contextual images to remind everybody. There was an open courtyard. Um and then in 201617 D uh Isosaki's associate David Gald came
back and added enclosed the courtyard um enclosed and educ expanded the education wing and a few other interior u modifications to expand gallery space and add circulation. So this is really the context that we're working on um today. So here's our proposed project.
This is this is um the panost building looking west. Our site is there, as you all know, in the southwest corner of the site, the existing parking lot. Um, just a few context shots. I'll just direct you to the lower right image, which is our site. It's an unbuilt, sort of the unrealized corner of the museum and a
fragment of the overall park. Um, looking south and north along park is of course the the hotel and then the dance school. So, we're thinking about those kind of anchor buildings. I think it's worth noting that the way the corner
comes together there, each one of those buildings um really marks that corner in terms of its architecture and the massing of those buildings. And so we thought very much about how to address the corner in the way that we cited this new pavilion um in relationship to the
urban corner and also the park um and the museum. So here is an illustration of that elevation. I think with the addition those two pavilions, you get a sense of how the massing starts to break down and allow us to bring landscape and public space um right up to those
buildings. Um our site is all in is about 18,500 square ft. Um this is a site plan of as the uh project exists today. There's the parking lot and here is the proposed ground floor plan. And I'll zoom in to say a little bit more,
but we um I think as staff said, we're keeping a quite a distance from the existing museum. We're adding a new um entry there in orange. I'm not sure if there's a maybe um this is the new
Can you guys see that? Anyway, there this orange piece. I guess it's not showing on the screen. There's a small addition to the Isuzaki. You can use the cursor on the laptop if you'd like. >> Okay. Yeah. Great. So, just to clarify, this orange piece is the addition to the Isuzaki building and this is the pan
coast. So, we're not proposing any change to that um through this project. Um so, just zooming in a little bit and you can note that we're highlighting the date of the submitted drawing here. So, this is what we submitted. One piece that I've again going back to um the
entry one of the additions that we or developments of the project that we've made since this is to expand that entry. So we've consolidated for visitor services and flow. We've expanded that and that will be our main point of um kind of ticketing and such for the addition. A couple of other just quick
highlights that um of course this is park here and then 21st we have two accessible ramps that lead you up to about a 12,000 square foot raised patio which is at the elevation of the existing museum. So once you get up there everything is accessible. Our project the yellow square is the new
gallery. Um there's a covered um kind of arrival porch that has top lit daylight and then the gray outline is the covered patio. So, the pro the our vision here is that once you get on site, you're in a sheltered rain, sheltered from rain and sun. Um, and that allows you to go
into the new gallery and the existing museum. Um, a couple of the changes just to highlight that we've um we've relocated the window along Park 21st. It's a smaller window. It's been it's been shifted a little bit um to the east. We've removed a bathroom from our
building. We've created um perforations in the perimeter walls so it's more visually accessible from the street. Um we've, as I've noted, expanded the reception area and um made a few other minor architectural changes that wouldn't really be visible at all to the
public. So this is what we submitted. Um and here is the revised. I think in the section, um there's probably not much change at all. I think just also to note that in the new building all of the mechanical is hidden um by the parapits. So we really are thinking a lot about
the visibility um of the lack of visibility of all the new infrastructure. So I want to walk you through a few views of course to highlight in in this view in particular we've eliminated the landscape so that you can see the proposal. This is from um the north north west side of the
site. Um so this was this was before and essentially we've been developing the material pal a little bit more. I think that's one of the major changes here. Um before um and just in in highlight, we were proposing a little bit um cooler um a little bit darker pallet below that
canopy to mitigate sun and reflectivity and such um within the kind of main kind of inhabitable part of the project. So here um the upper volumes um are now stuckcoed that are we're working very closely with the pallet of the Isosaki building. So that very much mirrors um
the the existing buildings. You can see the new perforated um perimeter walls and the board formed concrete of the gallery walls. So this is before I think one thing to note too is um this window which before was a continuous storefront
window and now that is a smaller opening. It's about a third of the size. Um we were just getting too much daylight into the space and then some of the textures and materials below the canopy. you can see there and those are highlighted here
once again. Um, now we're on 21st Street. So, this is that second ramp. Um, be behind this wall on the other side of the gallery. Um, just a little bit more quiet pallet beneath the canopy, the stucco
and the window revision. This was the the previous um proposal and now basically we've I think it reflects the new material pallet a little a few changes in the landscape um and um I think another thing to highlight here is
this the expanded vestibule um which combines all of the visitor services in that one location. So this is the new proposed with the expanded canopy we've ch and highlights the materials. This is a view towards the pan coast
building. So we're simply proposing um that the change here is simply about the garden pallet um that we're continuing to revise in terms of the plantings. It's a very sort of we we think a lovely relationship between the historic building and our and our project. a lot of space between and the garden becomes
kind of the elevation, the veil between the two spaces. And now we're out um in the park. This was the proposal before. Once again, it's primarily just some evolutions of the landscape pallet. So, just a one or two remaining slides
um about the material pallet above the canopy, which um at the street level is about 15 ft above grade and when you get up to the patio, it's 12. Everything above that is very simple um white stucco and then um more textured and and
specific below. So those materials um on the >> just really quickly just how much more time do you think you >> This is the last. >> Okay, perfect. >> Yeah. Um so on the on the um left side of the slide is the existing materials. Of course the most significant one is
the Keystone um uh kind of limestone of the pan coast building. a lot of texture and so our materials are with the with the bore for concrete are trying to reflect that but also we're engaging pan coast and also isaki so it's a very
subtle palette I would say the differences have to do with texture and some tone but we're we're really trying to harmonize with the different historic eras of the building and lastly just a few models um to give some context and really reinforce when you see the rotunda in relationship to
the pavilions that we're I think we're transforming this campus into a series of pavilions in the park, making it more immersed in landscape um and and accessible to the public. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Thank you.
>> Do we have any board questions for the applicant? Ray does. Well, um, naturally because it's Collins Park, I'm always worried about the landscaping. And, um, I notice that you're taking out all the trees except for transplanting one, but
you don't say where you're transplanting that tree. And also, I don't understand why you can't leave tree number 86. It it's it's a nice tree. I believe looking at the way this is laid out, you should be able to include that in your
plan. And usually whenever somebody is taking over something like this, they take into consideration the trees that are there and try and work somewhat around them. I understand why you can't save any of the others >> with the covering that you have. Um but
I definitely would like to know where you're transplanting the one tree and why you can't save tree 86. >> Okay. Um >> and then the other thing is is is this a two-story building? >> It's a one-story building. Well, because at the height you're showing it at the
same height as the other buildings and and and they're two stories. So, I just was wondering about that. >> Yeah, thank you. I mean, it's comes from a couple different I'll answer the the your first question um or the the second one about the height. So, we need a certain height to have clearance. We
have about 18 ft clear inside the gallery. Then we have some area for services mechanical and lighting and our we're the new HBAC equipment the mechanical systems to support this building are on the roof. It was important for us to not have it at grade
and so the final parapit height is blocking that such that um from the street from we did a lot of studies to confirm that that wouldn't be visible um from vantage points in the park or the surrounding city. So on the other hand, we were looking very carefully at that
at the massing of the building in relationship to the Isuzaki structures. So um we're just trying to harmonize the kind of urbanistic order and then solve some of the um systems. >> I also noticed you could have saved tree 24, but that tree is not worth saving.
>> I looked at it very closely. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Does anyone else have questions for the applicant? Yeah, just a quick one. Can you go over the perforated material that you have above to hide to hide the mechanical
equipment? >> Yeah. So, that um the idea there is this is one of the kind of wall assemblies that we're still finalizing, but we we um have the idea that it could be either blocked like a stuckco block. Um and our
thinking is that it's it's possible. I think it gives it a lightness to the facade. So instead of just a completely monolithic building, it gives a kind of detail that you see in other places in the project. I think it's also, you know, certainly a detail that you see around Miami. It's part of our response
to a kind of contextual response. It's also possible something we've been thinking about is it might be a little bit of light might be on the roof. So at night there might be a little bit of light uh filtering through which we also think would give the building a lightness. One more
to the architect. Sorry. How are you going to drain the roof? It doesn't show any details. >> Yeah, that's so good that you didn't see. We're trying to hide it really carefully. There's a series of columns. There's three or four columns that um connect the cantalvered roof to the
ground. And those are all really carefully calibrated in place such that the drain pipes will be inside of those. >> Okay. So, nothing external. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. Anyone else have questions for the applicant?
Are do we have any board disclosures? >> It's going to be a great event space. >> Yeah. >> Because it's totally walled in. I mean, right now, whenever you have weddings or anything like that, you know, they're just sort of stuck out in a big park and and and uh and also you've tried to
bring a cafe outside. It's just like this will be very nice all walled in and I think you've done a really nice job. Thank you. >> All right. So, do we have an um anybody on Zoom or anybody in the audience who wants to speak? All right. Looks like we have one in the chambers.
>> Good morning board members. Meto of Miami Design Preservation League. Um, we recognize that the HPB's review of the stage is focused primarily on the building's massing materials and architectural detailing. And I now understand that there have been some minor modifications to the plans that we actually reviewed, uh, although I think
they're pretty consistent with what we saw. And we are supportive of the staff's conclusion that the proposed contemporary design successfully incorporates references to the site's historic character. We find several design elements to be particularly successful, including the eyebrow detailing, perforated parapits, and the
treatment of the main entry, all of which contribute positively to the project's architectural expression. As the design continues to evolve, we look forward to reviewing the final plans and encourage further refinement to asssure a more seamless integration between the proposed addition and the existing historic buildings. Thank you.
>> Do we have anyone on Zoom? Um, yes, we have Brian Erlick. Good morning, Brian. >> Brian, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. You have two minutes.
>> Hi, I'm Brian Erlick. Uh, I've been a resident in Miami Beach for 21 years. I'm a former member of this board and full disclosure, I also sit on the board of the BASS, so I'm biased. I'm a big fan of the plan. Um, this is a
transformational project for our city. Museums today aren't just collections behind walls anymore. The best ones now live indoors and out. And they're built for people first, centered around community. This is our chance to build
this kind of public space that Miami Beach so desperately needs at a time when many spaces have become privatized. The Bass campus has never been one building. As we saw earlier in the presentation, Pankos gave us the original Florida Keystone structure in
1930. The library, Arata Isosaki, gave us the art wing decades later. Two architects, two eras, and until now, two buildings that never quite spoke to one another. And what's so cool about this project is it becomes the connective
tissue. The piece that finally joins these buildings, our existing art installations in this city and the campus to the community around it. When I think about the bats, I think about Ugo Rondon's neon boulders watching over Collins Park, Sylvie Flor's eternity now
glowing along Collins, and city's efforts to preserve the rotunda as a curatorial gem. Soon enough, we're gonna have Lawrence Weiner's Splash Pad, which is an interactive, refreshing oasis for anybody that steps onto it. But none of these elements ask somebody to buy a
ticket first. They just meet people where you already are. And the expansion in front of you today takes that same instinct and it builds it into the architecture itself. This site already has everything worth building around. the majestic baobob trees that Rey was
talking about. Pan Coast's original Florida Keystone. It is a plan worthy of this arts and culture campus. It works by embracing what we already have. Now, museum attendance is actually dropping nationally. Not because people stopped caring about art, but because for too
long, the model was four walls and an admission desk. And that isn't how people want to experience culture anymore. Look at what's brilliant about this design. That parking lot on the southwest corner becomes a striking entrance that finally beckons people to
come in. And you know exactly where the entrance of the museum is. A new gathering garden space built for people instead of cars surrounded by tropical landscaping. All the art moves outside as well as in across the site, not
confined to just one room. This museum isn't adding a wing so much as it's rethinking what counts as the museum in the first place. The city already voted yes on this once with the geo bond for the arts and the residents. The best museums today aren't choosing between
the past and what's next. They're building both at the same time. this board and this architect have the chance to shape what this museum becomes for the next century and to truly improve the lives of all of our residents. I think that the design and the waiver
deserves your support and I really look forward to seeing the final plans that you all conjure up together. Thank you. >> Thanks, Brian. Do we have anybody else on Zoom? No.
>> Okay. Uh board commentary, Randy. >> Right. >> Just what is the difference between now and when you're coming back? I did notice a lot of things in in the book where in some places you show uh like shrubbery along the wall and then other
renderings there's no shrubbery and it's like okay which is it? >> I think I noted in some views we were just trying to show you the architecture and so we didn't include that. But I think the landscape pallet is something that would be finalized by the the the next hearing. That's a key piece of the
project. >> Anyone else have board commentary? >> Go ahead. >> Yes. No. Thank you so much. I'm very happy to see that that wasted corner of the lot is finally being used for is being put for a good use. But as they say, either God or the devil is in the
detail. So I'm looking forward to seeing the rest the next generation of the plans and where you have all the details more worked out so it will be easier for us to understand the final look of the project. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So
we're looking at and and maybe this discussion for the board they've asked. Do you have commentary? >> I could comment. >> Go ahead then. I you know I I'm comfortable uh to to approve this today and with the
recommendation you work with staff to iron out the details. That's it. Okay. So I mean and that's what I was going to say. So before us we have the opt we have the option to approve or we
have an option to continue. Um, and so do we have a motion? >> Uh, I would make uh what I just stated as a motion uh to approve this today. Uh, if if everybody's comfortable with that, I feel uh confident that staff
could uh uh certainly uh deal with the uh minor details regarding the design. >> I beg to disagree. I think I would love to see the next iteration of the design with more details. Uh because I mean as I think
the details will make a difference in the project. >> Um so that would be my suggestion. Okay. So I we have a motion. Do we have a second to that motion that such that we would take a vote or are you withdrawing your motion, Mitch? Uh,
I'll I'll let it stand and if someone wants to second it, they can. >> Okay. >> I would second it as long as staff looks very closely at the landscaping part of the plan, you know, for for the final. I I know that you know what we're looking
for and I feel comfortable that that you could do that. I'm confident we can review the permit in accordance with our landscape code requirements. I wouldn't be as confident trying to to uh you know act on behalf
of the board without more specific direction. >> Okay. >> But in terms of reviewing the the landscape plan in accordance with the minimum landscape requirements, absolutely no problem. >> So I per Can
can we take a vote on the motion as it stands because I think we need no I think we we shouldn't really be making commentary on the motion but I mean that was a friendly amendment and staff is saying that does that meet your friendly amendment
requirements or would you withdraw your second for that reason? >> No, I'll I'll I'll leave the second. >> I'll leave the second. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. >> I just want to be clear. So, Elizabeth, you want to continue this? >> No, this is to approve it. >> I'd support Elizabeth.
>> I I would love to continue and I really appreciate your presentation. I really love the design, but I think the there are a lot of details that are not developed yet and I think they will make a big difference for the project and I would love to see them before we give you the final approval. So, and I
apologize to make you have you to come back, but I think it's part of the development of project and being something of such a large scope and so meaningful for the city. I think it's important for us to take another look. >> So, just to keep with what we need to do here, we have a motion. We have a
second. So, therefore, we need to take a vote. If that vote doesn't pass, then we can present a second motion by the just a motion and a second. Okay. So, we have a motion a second. So, we need to take a vote. Can we take a roll call vote, please?
>> Um, yes. But can I make one friendly uh suggestion that we um we have some conditions in the draft order. I would ask that those be incorporated with the exception of C1B,
which is is a paint color to be reviewed by the board. I'm I'm comfortable with doing that staff. So I would ask that the motion include the removal of that particular condition and that the motion include a reference to the presentation
that was given today because that is slightly different than what is included in your package. So does the >> Yes, I accept that. >> Okay. So can we do a roll call vote, please? >> Yes, I will do the roll call. Um, Miss
Cargo, >> no. >> No. >> Mr. Meyer, >> no. >> Mr. Brereslin, >> yes. >> Mr. Novik, >> yes. >> Um, Miss Levelvel, oh, Mr. Hollingworth, excuse me. Miss Levelvel, >> no.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, that fails. >> Okay. So, now we will need a motion to reconsider >> by a member who voted on the prevailing side. So, anyone who voted no could make the motion.
>> So, I'll make a motion to request the applicant to present again to this board. >> We first need Elizabeth a motion to reconsider. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to reconsider the motion. >> Okay. Is there a second? >> I'll second.
>> Okay. All in favor of the motion to reconsider? I >> Okay. The motion carries. >> So, now we can make the motion. So, I'll make a motion to ask the applicant to present the project again when once all the details have been developed and to
include the staff recommendations as Debbie has mentioned. >> Do we have a second for the motion? >> A second. And can I make a comment on I I would like for after assuming this motion passes
for us to provide some additional feedback to the applicant regarding what we want to see in this continuance >> so that you come back with the information and we can approve it which I expect will be the outcome. >> Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. >> Okay, so are are my movement and my
second are you guys okay with that? Yes, I'm okay with your friendly amendment. >> And this is to the September meeting, correct? >> That's our plan. >> Yes. >> Okay. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Okay. So, so we'll see you
back in September, but I think the board wants to to discuss what they what they expect to see. >> Okay. So, I think Elizabeth spoke about it a little bit and I just didn't get a chance because we had a motion and second on the table. Um, so I'm curious to see any sort of tree mitigation that
we can do. I understand there's an option to pay fees, but within the park. I'm Ray caught me with that and I want to see more of that and kind of more information on what we're doing. I'm, you know, I know some of some of the trees that we're losing. I'm very
sad to lose. I get that some of them we have to. Um but uh I think that was the part that um our madam planning director was saying that she she could abide by the code but what we're looking for and so perhaps Ray if you can speak to that a little bit more. I don't know if you have anything else and then Randy I
think has some commentary as well. >> Yes. >> Go ahead. Um my concern is that projects like this become very architectural >> and so architectural that they become a statement that sort of lack that sensitivity to the pedestrian and in the
drawings I see it and there's inconsistency as said that you see this very architectural drawing you even admitted for the architecture we get rid of the landscape and I I fear that in the final we end up with these very stark very hot very sort of hostile
architectural projects. I just want to make sure that on the streetscape we don't end up with these very you know um architectural statement versus an urban design statement is a very important project and also the whole point of minimum code this project definitely
cannot be minimum code and I don't think you're treating it like that but to be review it like that would be just you know terrible uh it's like minimum architecture it's not it's it's a design I think the landscape is very very important >> I'm not I'm not saying tree it all up
with trees. I'm just saying the walking experience around that project on the sidewalks is also very very important. >> Completely agree. Thank you for your sensitivity to that. >> Do we have any other feedback relating to their return in September? September.
>> September 15th, I think it is. >> No. Do you have any questions for us that you need answered prior to that time? >> I don't think so. I mean, we have so much support from the staff, so I think we'll be well prepared and appreciate the input. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> And and if you are relocating tree number 28, I want to know where it's going. >> And you could probably keep it. >> Actually, actually, unrelated to the trees. Um will we have updated materials showing the updated presentation?
You know, there was what was already in the presentation is different than the materials we had before. Will we have updated materials for the continuence in September? >> Yes. I mean, >> I'm getting ahead of that over here. >> Yes. Yeah. Okay. Thank you so much. All right. Appreciate it. >> Bye.
>> Okay. The next application is HPV 26692. This is 141 to 145 Southshore Drive. An application has been filed requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of two existing one-story contributing structures within the North
Beach National Register District. Um this is also within the Northshore um local historic district and the construction of a new four-story multif family residential building. Uh they are also requesting a waiver from the minimum understory height requirements.
Um so this particular application does involve uh a two uh contributing buildings that were designed uh by Gilbert Fine and constructed in 1953. Uh
they are both one-story structures um and have been relatively remained relatively intact since their original design and construction. Um you know staff is you know takes any request for total
demolition of a contributing building very seriously. Um we did evaluate these based on um the existing conditions. I will say the existing uh it's lo these properties are located in the RM1 residential
zoning district. The only allowable uses in this district is residential. Uh both buildings currently sit below 6 ft NGVD. Um any residential unit for this particular property would be required to
be at a minimum of 9GVD. Um so during our discussions with the applicant um we did express concern over the demolition. However um balancing the the requirements for housing
um identifying these buildings as very challenging to adapt uh primarily given their one-story design. This is something that during the local designation process, which I was extremely involved in, we did have
discussions with the board. Um, we do, you know, at the time of the designation, we surveyed all of the buildings. Um, and in that that was kind of the second survey, right? Because they were surveyed first for the National Register listing. We re-erveyed them for the local district designation
10 years later. Um and we did discuss one-story buildings and how um one-story buildings particularly of this um construction period in the post-war were likely not going to be able to be saved.
Um specifically if they're converted to res residential use and cannot be lifted um that there's really no viable use for these particular properties without a significant if not total demolition. Um and we did uh you know when those local
districts uh were adopted um you know we also pointed out that because of the uniqueness of Miami Beach but in particular this area um that we're likely going to have to be more flexible in terms of creative design and
potentially demolition uh within this area in order to to uh revitalize um this particular neighborhood with with new housing back. So after you know uh discussing this with the applicant um we are supporting
the demolition request I think it's also very important to point out and for anyone watching that this is not a situation of demolition by neglect. This is a property owner that maintained these buildings. Um they had tenants in the buildings. They went through uh
building reertification processes. So this is not an instance where the property owner is coming before you saying well you know I neglected my property for the past 20 years and I have no alternative. This is more of a practical um challenge to to uh the city
in terms of how do we if possible adapt some of these one-story buildings with a a slab type foundation. So long story short we are um supporting the demolition. Um, we would uh also commend the applicant on the new design.
Uh, there are very specific uh regulations in this north uh beach national register overlay area that do require uh additional movement in the facade. Um, you can see how the the taller height is stepped back from the
street. Um the the units will have at least two exposures to natural light and air. That's part of this uh conservation district overlay. Um so in general, we're supportive of the design. Um they've also uh proposed to incorporate
high quality uh stone material at the lower portion. Um, they've introduced some additional features that do um reference the post-war character of of North Beach, including uh projecting eyebrows
um and uh vertical elements to to um as a counterpoint to the uh horizontal uh emphasis of the building. So, we are supportive of the design and we are asking the board to to approve the certificate of appropriateness. In addition to the certificate of
appropriateness, the applicant is also requesting a waiver. Um, the regulations require a ground floor of a new project to have a floor to ceiling height clearance of 12 ft above base flood
elevation plus freeboard. So again, base flood elevation plus freeboard here is nine. So it would be a the requirement the strict requirement is 12 feet above that point. They are proposing um to
have 10 ft uh which staff does believe is is adequate. I think by you know lowering that by by requesting that twoft waiver it does help uh the character of the district uh more so um
than than if that that ground floor had to be taller. So, we are supportive of the waiver as well. Um, I'm also a available for any questions um if you have, but if not, we can turn it over to the applicant.
>> Do we have any questions for staff? >> Okay, seeing none, go ahead. >> Can we put the presentation on? >> Thank you. Here. So, good morning. Uh my name is Eddie Seymour with Flux Architects. I am
representing the applicant for the proposed project on 141 and 145 uh Southshore Drive. So here on the screen we're showing a map uh showing that there are currently two existing one-story buildings. >> Could you move the microphone a little closer?
>> Sure. Sure. Can you hear me now? Okay. So there are currently two existing one-story buildings on the site which are contributing to the North Beach National Register. uh they were designed by architect Gilbert Fine uh and the post century uh postwar modern start. Uh
both buildings have approximately a height of 10 ft. Each uh building has four units uh for a total of eight units. Uh and they are adjacent to the Normandy Shores Golf Course. On either side of these properties, there are two ex uh there are twotory buildings which
I'm showing here. Uh if you look at the top right corner, there are two existing uh twotory existing buildings on either side. Directly in front in the center image here, there's a sixstory uh building. And just two blocks over on the west side, there's a brandly
completed fourstory building with 49 total units. So, as you can see, our neighbors are significantly uh taller in height than what the current buildings are. Uh currently like staff mentioned both existing buildings are 2 and 1/2 ft
below the base flood elevation of 8 and GBD which has led to a sporadic flooding and subsequent damages which has caused hardships not only to the tenants but also to the owners uh due to the repair cost and the high insurance premiums. Uh
so this proposal is seeking uh to replace the two existing buildings with a highquality residential offering that respects the architectural heritage of Normandy the Isles while introducing a contemporary uh living standards. So if I go back to the front here this is a uh
red ring showing the proposed uh facade of the building. And if I first uh I want to explain that we we gathered uh inspirational images for the the postwar uh contemporary style. Uh and we picked
up on some certain elements such as the flat roof lines, the cantalver eyebrows and balconies, the clean lines, uh the stepbacks in the facade. And we try to incorporate that into this uh design that we're presenting today uh while
trying to minimize the height in the front and also uh making it uh somewhat uh user friendly and and trying to make it fit into the context of the neighborhood. So first uh if you look at the ground level we have a central lobby
which incorporates uh ceiling to floor uh I'm sorry floor to ceiling uh storefronts and we also broke up the building in the center by incorporating a courtyard on the second floor in order to pay pay homage to the existing two buildings that are there now and further
break out the facade on the front street. So it's not just a massive solid building in the front. We try to really uh break up that facade. And by doing so on the second floor, we also have a secondary advantage to doing that. We
have a courtyard that can be used by the tenants uh the residents uh to you know which acts as a generator of um connectivity between the neighbors. that you can go outside, get some fresh air, uh enjoy the views uh right from that
courtyard into the street front. Uh and so we feel like that was very appropriate for this proposal. Uh on the ground floor, we also have uh we're proposing to have a limestone finish that more or less wraps around the entire ground floor of the building in
order to break up the materiality of the building as well. So it's not all just a stugle finish on the exterior. Uh we are also proposing as you can see here uh on the second floor balconies once you go up to the uh the third floor the the
balcony there is slightly stepped back in order to reinforce the idea of the uh the step back which was very common in that architectural style. Uh and also once you get to the roof line like the staff mentioned we are respecting the
required setbacks which are an additional 25 ft at a height of above 32 ft. We are respecting that and providing that setback uh for the rest of the building. Uh and now I would like to show you some aonometric views
of the building which uh if I can zoom in here which to further explain what's happening up there. I think this view from the uh front facade gives you a better understanding of what's happening on the roof line. So as you can see here on the front we are respecting that
additional setback and for the residents in those upper units we are providing some very nice uh ample size uh roof terraces uh uh which every single roof terrace would have a summer kitchen with a pergola to provide uh shading for the
residents that would be using those spaces and uh we tried to really maximize on on that level we tried to maximize the roof terraces as much as we possibly could. So we just have a uh basically a a landing area for the
residents of the units below to walk up to that space and then exit into the exterior. Uh on the very top level we are providing a 4 uh foot 8 in uh parapit to make sure that we are uh uh
covering any mechanical equipment that would go up there. And let me just continue through. Oh, and I also want to mention that on that front facade, we are also providing the required front porch area. If you look there on the bottom left corner, we
are providing that uh which is a requirement. So, we were able to to meet that requirement and we also have a a considerable amount of landscaping. We we decided to provide a tiered approach. So, we have basically the the landscaping at the ground level and then
we have a midway planter. I guess you could say it's like um halfway up that porch area in order to provide further uh landscaping in front of that porch. So, it's not just a blank solid wall on the front street.
Oh, sorry. Let me go back. And I also want to mention that we are providing ADA access. If I can just get the right image. We are providing ADA access from the street. Um on the west side we have an
uh ADA compliant ramp that goes up into the the higher elevation of the uh of the base floor. So you have ADA access to the front porch and also to the garage level to the on the first level. Uh here we have a diagram showing the
existing uh buildings, the height of the existing buildings in comparison to the the neighbors and the height of the proposed building. Uh here I want to show you the ground level site plan. So, as you can see from the street level, we have the the main
entrance uh with the front porch and we have uh the driveway uh which provides access to the parking on the ground floor. So, for the one-bedroom units, we're providing one stall and for the two-bedroom units, we're providing two
stalls in tandem arrangement. So, all the units would have um parking If you go up to the second floor here, you can see that central courtyard that I mentioned earlier. Uh, and also we have we are proposing a fitness area on
that second level. Uh, it's not I would say it's not it's not a large fitness area, but it's whatever we were able to fit within the very constrained sites. Uh, so that would act as an amenity for the residents. And then here on the third level, uh all of these units would have access to the
upper level uh roof terrace. And this is that roof level uh terrace level that I mentioned earlier. So here you can see the the stairs from the units below that would go up to this level. And then you you would have direct access to the outside on the roof
terrace. Uh here we have the elevations showing the the heights the proposed heights of the building. I do want to uh mention that the maximum height allowed in this district is 45 ft and we are slightly below that by 4 in. We are proposing 44
ft and 8 in going to the top of the parapit. And here we also have some sections cutting through uh the building at different uh locations. Uh again showing that we are trying to respect the the front street uh by setting back the
building and meeting the the required setback at the front. Uh we also have some landscaping plans. We uh we understand that it's a very tight site but we also wanted to make sure that we provided the necessary landscaping and meet the the
requirements not just the minimum requirements but tried to go above and beyond. So as you can see here we have a full set of landscaping plans uh with the legend and we have a variety of different cret types uh that we are proposing especially along the front facade the the street facade to make
sure that we make that a very appealing u and a and a positive to the neighborhood. Uh here we have that legend showing all the the different uh vegetation that we are proposing and we also show the plans for that
courtyard uh the third floor and that roof uh level as well where we have the roof territories. So I think at this point I'd like to turn it over to you guys if you have any questions for him.
>> Okay. Do we have any questions for the applicants? Do you have a sample of this railing material? Because it looks, in my opinion, like almost like I'm in jail. And if you have a sample that we could
look at, that would be really great. And your entrance, I mean, it looks like a gang way. It should be wider. Why aren't you bringing your your your your front porch area all the way over to the end of the windows um and having a wider staircase
going up to the building. I mean it it's a beautiful building and you've got this little narrow >> stairway going up to it which I think is degrading to it in my opinion. >> Yeah, we can certainly make that change and make that improvement.
Randy, your questions? >> Yeah, I I second that. Also, I don't know if the renderings are inaccurate. Are all the windows dark tinted on the building? Cuz that looks like that in the renderings. >> Are they just clear glass? >> Yeah, it it would not be a dark tint. It
would be a light grayish tint, which was recommended to us by staff. That's uh typical of that architectural style. >> Okay. It's just I I on the previous comment was the the whole entry area looks really negative because in the rendering it looks like a dark windows.
You can't see in. It doesn't look like the building has an entrance. I guess that would be my best statement. It's it's missing that feeling of where do you enter? Is it covered protected? It's completely exposed. It has no canopy. I I I think the whole entry could be a lot more attractive and be consistent with
the two side pieces which are also very are very nice because they reflect the style of what was there. So, okay. >> I think your entry area needs work. Um I I think that the rendering of the perspective is different from a landscape point of view than the plan. Um I'm I'm trying to figure out what's
actually on the plan. Okay. Because the rendering isn't representative of your actual landscape plan. I'm just trying to figure it out. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Do we have any other questions? >> No, I just agree with what has been said
about the entrance. Um, it has no expression of the entrance. And I think like the mions, they are very narrow. I think nowadays you can have nice wider panes of glass and it's not extremely unaffordable as it used to be in the past. And you could make more of a
gesture at the entrance making the stairs why they're having a covered area. I mean, if it's pouring and you need to open the door with the key, you don't want to be drenched. So, I think you could have you could improve the entrance that way. And I just have something that I would like to share
with everybody about the elevation of this building because I understand that the 9 ft it's the base flood elevation plus freeboard, but it's the minimum freeboard. So brings you to 9 ft which I understand the concerns of making it
lower because of the accessibility from the street which is you have to several feet to go up but my concern is that when you make the lobby level at 10 only and let's say in the future the situation gets worse you don't have much room to grow. So let's say your lobby
start getting flooded because the sea level is rising and you are only only at 10 ft at that point. If you have your lobby height a little bit more generous, you you still have some room to raise the the flood the floor elevation of
your lobby level and still be another foot above flooding. >> Okay. >> So, I understand the constraints, but I think um if you're preparing ourselves for the future, we need to understand that the conditions may change as been
anticipated. Um and the neighborhood will change too. So maybe we're trying to make the building today a little bit more cohesive with the neighborhood, but that neighborhood will be changing and maybe in 5 years from now the neighbor will be building at 13 above uh NGVD
instead of so I think there is some space for flexibility in that. >> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. >> Any other questions? >> Ask all no more questions. Okay. Um,
okay. So, if we don't have any more questions, do we have any board disclosures? No. Okay. Uh, do we have comment? So, we have one speaker in the audience. Do we have anyone on Zoom? Okay. All right. >> Good morning again. Uh, Me Lust, Miami
Design Preservation League. Uh, we do not oppose proposed demolition. We understand the staff's rationale there and we commend several aspects of the proposal for new construction including the building setback, the overall massing strategy and the incorporation of the central courtyard. All of which contribute positively to the project's
site planning and spatial organization. However, we have significant concerns regarding the architectural design. Overall, the project lacks originality with an aesthetic that looks dated. The composition, color, and material palette appear disjointed, resulting in an overall impression that lacks cohesion and visual refinement. The facade lacks
a clear hierarchy with numerous projecting elements that create visual clutter rather than a cohesive composition. We suggest the design draw more directly from the city's pre-existing mid-century architecture and respond more thoughtfully to the character of the surrounding neighborhood. While contemporary design is entirely appropriate, it should
reflect the distinctive character of Miami Beach rather than rely on a generic multif family vocabulary that could be found in any growing metropolitan area. New construction should reinforce the city's unique architectural identity and sense of place. And if I can just add, I think you had a great example of that just down the street earlier today during
this meeting with the affordable elderly housing, uh, the Breeze building. Greater emphasis should be placed on the use of higher quality, contextually appropriate materials that reflect the South Florida vernacular. For example, the proposed railings are harsh and institutional and present an opportunity for a more thoughtful and distinctive
design that could contribute to the overall character. Several design elements appear inconsistent throughout the project, diminishing the strength of the overall composition. In particular, the exterior stairwell is significant concern as it appears disconnected from the building's architectural expression and feels like an afterthought rather
than part of the configuration. The proposed color palette further contributes to the lack of cohesion and the ground floor reads as closed off with limited visual and functional engagement. Greater attention should be given to the pedestrian experience by creating more open, inviting and visually engaging ground floor that fosters a stronger connection between
the building and those who experience it at street level. Miami Beach has earned its global reputation through architecture that is distinctive, enduring, and rooted in its local context. Almost done. Where buildings are designed to express both their function and the character of the neighborhoods they serve. We encourage this project to aspire to that same
level of architectural elegance, sorry, excellence by creating a building that will contribute positively to the city's design legacy for decades to come. Thank you. >> Thank you. And we have someone on Zoom, correct? Yes, we have Carlos
Chinios. >> Carlos, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. Yes. >> Thank you. You have two minutes. >> Uh, hi. Hello everybody. Um, I'm I'm I'm a neighbor. I live across the property
that is being discussed right now. My concern is that we are changing the character of the neighborhood. On top of that, we are uh you know incrementing the density of the area. It is a pretty you know small uh street,
pretty quiet area of Normandy. Um my concern uh is that these type of constructions will change the character will change will create more traffic problems
because we will drive more people to to to to the song. Of course uh I'm I'm worried that this will be continue happening with another similar buildings that are pretty distinctive in style.
uh the the the the way it is now is what girl was geared to this particular area. So we are not particularly happy with this sprite. Do we have anyone else? No. Okay.
Okay. Um board members. Okay. Ready to have commentary? Well, I I think just based on our comments, we're probably really looking at continuing this item. But, however, I think if we're going to do that, we have to first off vote on whether we approve the demolition, you
know, as a as a board and and then once we do that, knows whether he can go on to >> So, it's all one vote, >> huh? >> So, it is it would all it would be all one vote. Well, the thing is is if I think we're going to have to continue
it, and I'd hate to see it then get shot down because somebody doesn't want the demolition. >> What you could do is take a straw poll on the demolition, but I I wouldn't recommend separating the vote, >> right? So, we could do that. >> I mean, we could certainly do that. I mean
I I will say that I'm of the opinion that I want to see the project as proposed which which factors into my decision on demolition if that makes sense. Right? So um we could take a short hole. Um you
know I I guess I would say like if the project works then my support of demolition would be related to that related to that I guess is is my point. But if you want to take a short poll, I'm happy to do that. >> I was only concerned that, you know, like we give him all of these comments
and he goes and changes everything and then comes back and we say, "Oh, we don't want to have the building demolished." That was my concern. >> That is that is fair. So, um, if we I'm trying to figure out how to phrase that. Um,
so I guess a straw pull as to would you be in favor of demolition pending a project that an accepted project a project that garers the support of the board. So um, if we can take a straw poll on that.
Can I call the role or are you calling the role? Okay. Uh, Randy. >> Yes. >> Okay. And make sure your mic is on, guys. Ray. Yes, >> Haskell. >> Yes, >> Mitch. >> I'd be supportive of the demolition. I I
do believe uh I I uh I appreciated Meg's comments from MDPL. Uh the project re we reviewed earlier uh in the same neighborhood was uh of extraordinary
design. This has uh I I believe a way to go to at least meet that threshold in my opinion. >> Okay, Elizabeth. >> Me too. Okay. And as I've said, I would be supportive of demolition, you know, pending a project that gets the support
of the board. >> Um so obviously that's not binding, but that gives you an idea and and ownership to the extent that they're here in this room. Um, so do we have any further commentary that we would like to provide to the
applicant? Um, I anticipate that we're going to vote move and vote for continuance. So commentary that would help them achieve what we're looking for when continued. I >> Well, I've sort of said in the beginning
um I I didn't like the railing structure at all. That's why I thought if you had a sample of it, you could change my mind. But right now, I looked at that and said, "You've got to be kidding me." And then to see that gangway entrance like you're going to a cruise ship or or anything. It it just it doesn't work
with that building at all. And I I think you have to look at that very carefully um in when you come back. >> Absolutely. >> Ask you question. >> I I do have a question first and then I'll make my comments. Why do you find the need to encroach into the setback
with your balconies? you're extending about three to four feet in some cases. Why? >> Yes. So, that was actually in conversation with the staff. We were encouraged that we can encroach up to 25% allowed by the the code in order to further define the architectural style,
which is very common to have those large wraparound balconies and eyebrows. >> That Okay, this point leads me to an overall view of where we're headed in this city. you know, um, a few properties to the west that start single family homes.
Most of the buildings in the area were two stories until probably the 60s and 70s when they started to go up to five or six stories. And essentially that's what we're building here about four or five, sixtory building street. >> Um,
I'm I'm just not sure that I can support that idea. I see it in too many buildings around the city where they're out of out of context in terms of their mass uh and relative to the surrounding neighborhood. I don't want to stop you from doing this
project. I think it improves the the area in terms of benefit to uh residents giving them options. But to have such a large project on a uh such a site and then extend
beyond into the into the uh setbacks, it's something that I can't approve because we're opening up that Pandora's box again and future properties all over the city. Uh and I can give you dozens of examples that just are not in context
with the original character and what we should maintain in in this city. So as of today, any encroachment for me into the setbacks when you're designing a 50 60 uh foot tall building, I will
not support. Just FYI. >> Thank you. >> Understood, >> Mitch. >> Yeah. I just uh wish you could design this with a little better uh homage to midcentury architecture. I just don't
see it here and uh I think it would be incompatible with the uh neighborhood as designed. >> Okay. >> Elizabeth, did you have any commentary? >> I just I want to um Mitch, if you could clarify when you're saying compatible
with the neighborhood, you're talking about the massing or the architectural style or both >> architectural style. And uh you know uh contextually I uh quite frankly I'm I'm I'm not familiar with
this immediate block. >> Well, I will say on this block we have the the project that came before us earlier today. >> Yeah. >> And the one across the street. So those two I mean they're newer obviously, but those would be context. Um they're >> good point. I'm I'm just
>> and as as stated the uh project that came to us earlier was extraordinary in design and this uh I I think there's uh room for much improvement. I I appreciate what Ry uh
my colleague Ray had stated. It looks like a gang way. Those two doors are just cold. The stairway is uninviting. I think there is ways to uh uh address that to make it more palatable for the
pedestrian and for the neighborhood. And uh also um the uh railing system uh what about exploring breeze block or something to uh soften that uh that util
utilitarian feeling that I I see here. Okay. >> So, um my commentary um I I tend to agree um with the commentary about the front entrance.
I would speculate I'm not going to like try to get into your head, but I would speculate that the expectation is the residents are going to pull into the parking and they're going to come in through the back. And so perhaps there wasn't as much thought given to the front entrance because you don't expect them to be arriving on foot and going
through the lobby from the front, but their guests will. The people in the neighborhood are going to be walking by, um, etc. And so kind of balancing that arrival perspective from the resident who's going to pull in and probably not
come through the front and the arrival of their guests or um, the walk by of the neighbors. um within you know within the context of the neighborhood. I will say and I will defer to the experts which would be city and obviously um you know the applicants
architect um that while I think there's there's been a lot of uh commendation towards uh breeze and vista are they are they typical of the um
of the style of the post-war or the the mid-century style? Yes. But they also read a little to me um little commercial to me. Um the solid flat front with no articulation or breakup of that solid
piece. So I app I personally appreciate some sort of um you know the windows or something that's going to provide uh texture to um the front facade and and you're going
you're there or you're going there. we're getting some feedback to kind of make some changes. And so I'm just those are my opinions and I thought I would put that out there for the record so that you have that information. Um so perhaps working with staff to kind of find I'll call it a happy medium between
the two. Um and to not go so far over there. Also given the style of your development, I don't expect that that's going to be the case of a solid front wall. But I looked at the breeze and vista were the the uh it it looked like Macy's the old birdines like you know
that's what it read to me and um and so I just wanted to provide that piece of feedback um to not swing too far that direction would be my preference. >> Understood. >> Um so that's the commentary. Um it seems as though we're leaning towards a
continuence. Do we have a motion or second as to how to handle the application? >> Right. >> I move to continue it. >> To what date would they like? >> Do you have a preference as to timeline?
>> September. >> Yeah. September. >> September. Okay. And what's the deadline for them to have things back? >> Um, it will be early next month. So, we'll reach out to you to to confirm. >> I just want to make sure that gives you enough time. That's all. >> Okay. That's fine.
>> Motion to continue on the motion. >> A second. >> Take a vote. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> We'll see you in September. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. >> Okay, Madame Chair, I don't think we
have any other business um from staff on the agenda. And if if the board is has nothing further, we can adjourn. No, we can adjourn and uh we are in recess in August and we'll be back in September.