Loading...
34 CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES MONDAY, October 25, 2010 City Commission Chamber 7:30 P.M. EXCERPT I. Call to order: Ms. Shelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. II. Roll Call: Roll call was performed. Board members present constituting a quorum: Ms. Shelley, Mr. Hochstim, Ms. Clyatt, and Mr. Kurtzman, Ms. Lahiff, Ms. Dison and Mr. La Monica. Board members absent: Mr. Ruiz de Castilla. City staff present: Thomas J. Vageline (Planning & Zoning Director), Lourdes Cabrera- Hernandez (Principal Planner), Sanford Youkilis (Consultant) and Alerik Barrios (Board Secretary). VI. HISTORIC DESIGNATION: HPB-10-003: 5875 Sunset Drive (Dowling Building  Review of Historic Site Designation Report*  Public comments  Designation action Mr. Youkilis informed the Board that the Designation Report for the building contains sections on historic context of the building, the history of the persons associated with the building and the architectural distinction of the building. The report ends with the eligibility for designation recommended for designation by the Historic Preservation Consultant and staff. The item has been deferred several times since February 2010 and the applicant requested certain documents be provided to him. The designation process does not need a public hearing. The Board may consider the recommendation of staff and professionals on the Designation Report. The next step after the Board’s action is converting it into a zoning map change and than the City Commission reviews the item. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Ryan Bailine representing the property owner requested that the item be deferred. He commented that they maintain their position on the item and are willing to work with staff on minor adjustments. The item came before you in July, the information that was provided was correct, but one issue that is unresolved is the legal description. Under the Land Development Code, the report must include a signed and sealed survey by a registered surveyor and it Page 2 of 3 wasn’t until a couple of days ago that the staff provided the applicant with the report. He commented that the legal description of the survey is not the same as the designation report. In response to the issue, staff provided a letter dated October 18, 2010, stating that the legal description contained in the Designation Report is correct and matches the records of the County property appraiser. Mr. Bailine commented that he printed out the property appraiser’s legal description and it is not the same on the survey. He informed the Board he does not mind working with the staff on fixing the gap in the legal description. Mrs. Shelley questioned what the remedy for the issue is. Mr. Bailine responded that the applicant would like the report to contain the correct legal description and once the correction has been made they are willing to work with staff. Mr. Kurtzman commented that there is no difference between both legal descriptions. Mr. Bailine agreed and commented that to correct himself the property appraiser’s description and the one in the Designation Report are the same but do not match the survey. Mr. Kurtzman questioned the outside staircase on the property. Mr. Bailine responded that the answer cannot be given since there is no accurate survey and there is also no agreement on maintaining the staircase. Mrs. Shelley questioned if the survey has to be done by the City. Mr. Youkilis responded that according to the Land Development Code, the Historic Designation Report does not need to include a current survey. It does not say that the survey needs to be done, but the only thing included is the legal description. He commented that the City needs to use the Miami-Dade County legal description from the property appraiser’s office. Mr. Robert Barron (managing agent for the owner of the building) discovered that there was a missing parcel which was purchased in 1970. In order to clear it up, there needed to be a law suit filed. He commented that there will always be a cloud if the survey is not corrected. Mr. Barron saidthat he will meet with staff to go over technicalities and if a survey is needed then the city needs to pay for it. Mr. Barron commented that a section of the building, interior woodwork and floors, should not be considered historic since it was changed. Mr. Hochstim commented that if the original parts were modified the new changes need to be in harmony with what is currently there. When making changes to the building, the building does not need to resort back to the original appearance. He commented that the Board would not require remodeling to look as it was back in 1926, but to what the Board thinks it should look like. Mr. Youkilis commented that the Board only reviews exterior work not interior. Mr. Bailine then requested that the last sentence on p.10 referring to “original woodwork and floors” be removed. Staff agreed and recommended removing the wording in the report of the wood floors. Page 3 of 3 Motion: Mr. Kurtzman moved to approve the proposed designation with the change in the Designation Report on page 10 to remove the reference to preserving interior wood floors. Ms. Clyatt seconded. Vote: 7 Ayes 0 Nays Mr. Youkilis commented that this item will proceed to the Planning Board, but the date has yet to be determined. The owner will be informed of when the item is to be before the Planning Board. X:\Comm Items\2010\12-7-10\Historic.Minutes.Excerpt 10.25.2010.doc CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI Planning Board Planning Board Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Meeting Minutes Meeting Minutes Tuesday, November 9, 2010 Tuesday, November 9, 2010 City Commission Chambers City Commission Chambers 7:30 P.M. 7:30 P.M. EXCERPT-HISTORIC EXCERPT-HISTORIC I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:36 P.M. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison. II. Roll Call Action: Chair Yates requested a roll call. Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Cruz, Mrs. Young, Mr. Morton, Mrs. Yates, and Mr. Whitman. Board members absent: Mrs. Beckman and Mr. Farfan. City staff present: Thomas J. Vageline (Planning & Zoning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis (Planning & Zoning Consultant), Mr. Marcus Lightfoot (Permit Facilitator) and Lourdes Cabrera-Hernandez (Principal Planner). City Attorney: Mr. Laurence Feingold PB-10-039 (HPB-10-003) Applicant: City of South Miami (Historic Preservation Board) An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, relating to a request to amend the official zoning map of the City of South Miami Land Development Code by designating a commercial building located at 5875 Sunset Drive (aka The Dowling Building) as an historic site and by placement of an Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HP-OV) over the existing zoning use district for this property; providing for severability; providing for ordinances in conflict; and providing an effective date. Action: Mr. Morton read the item into the record. Planning Board November 9, 2010 Page 2 of 2 Mr. Vageline commented that the item is a recommendation to apply an Historic Designation on a parcel of land. The Dowling Building is located at 5875 Sunset Drive and was approved by the Historic Preservation Board by a vote of 7 ayes and 0 nays for designation. The Historic Designation Report was attached in order to inform the Board about the characteristics of the Building. This building is one of the oldest commercial buildings in the downtown area. The Chair opened the public hearing. NAME ADDRESS SUPPORT/OPPOSE PROJECT Ryan Bailine 201 S. Biscayne Blvd #1500 Oppose Mr. Bailine representing the owner, commented that this was a matter that was deferred for several months and it was brought to the Historic Board’s attention that the interior modifications are not covered by the ordinance. He requested that the Board remove a few of the references of the interior changes. Mr. Bailine commented that rather than nitpick the report the client proposed a general statement to be at the very end of the report on page ten. This statement would clarify that the interior of the building is not subject to any historic review. Mrs. Young questioned why the language was proposed at the end. Mr. Bailine responded that this language is not controversial. He commented that the client is in support of staff’s recommendation and the designation. Mrs. Young requested that she would like to see the origin of the document and the date prepared. She commented that another correction to the document would be the word Dowling Building in the last sentence. Mr. Youkilis informed the Board that the Historic Preservation Board members understood that interior renovation is not subject to a review process. Mr. Morton questioned if the client could provide a written statement to be included in the report. The Chair closed the public hearing. Motion: Mr. Cruz moved to approve the application with the condition that the proposed new language suggested by the applicant’s representative be added to page ten. Mrs. Young seconded. Vote: 5 Ayes 0 Nays Mrs. Yates informed the Board that the item will be placed on the City Commission agenda on December 7, 2010 for first reading. TJV/SAY X:\Comm Items\2010\12-7-10\PB.Minutes.Excerpt -Historic 11.9.2010.doc