06-10-08 Item 7South Miami
1
AII•America City
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001
To: The Honorable Mayor Feliu and Members of the City Commission
Via: Ajibola Balogun, City Manager
From: Sanford A. Youkilis, Acting Planning Directo, U _7
Date: June 3, 2008 ITEM No.
Subiect
A ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI,. AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 -5.17
"DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC SITES" IN ORDER TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS ON
REINITIATING AN HISTORIC DESIGNATION WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
DENIED BY THE CITY COMMISSION;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
BACKGROUND
The Land Development Code (LDC) currently provides a complete process for designation of
historic sites or districts. This Section (20 -5.17) sets forth the procedures to be followed by the
Historic Preservation Board, the Planning Board and the City Commission. The final step in the
process is the adoption of an ordinance by the City Commission which designates a site historic
and changes the zoning on that property to HP- OV.(Overlay).
The City Commission at its meeting on March 4, 2008 considered for the second time in three
years, the historic designation of the Allen's Drug Store building. The designation failed to be
adopted again. There were comments made by the out of town property owner that it was unfair
to proceed with the designation a second time since his opposition position was well known. It is
important to note that the Land Development Code does provide in Section 20 -5.8 (D) that a re-
zoning application (i.e. designation) if denied by the City Commission can not be reconsidered
for one year, however, there are no limitations after that time period.
The City Commission at its next meeting adopted Resolution No. 37- 08- 12634, sponsored by
Vice Mayor Beasley, requesting the Planning Board to amend the Land Development Code to
limit the historic re- designation of a property if it has been denied by the City Commission.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
The Planning Board at its May 13, 2008 meeting conducted a public hearing and suggested a
slightly different amendment be considered. The Board adopted a motion by a vote of 5 ayes 0
nays recommending that a new Section 20- 5.17(F)(4) would read as follows:
"(4) Reconsideration: A re- designation which has been denied by the City Commission
may only be reconsidered after five years or reinitiated at the request of the property
owner at any time. "
2
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD COMMENTS
The Historic Preservation Board at its March 31, 2008 meeting felt the obligation to comment
upon the pending amendment. A motion was passed by unanimous vote that the Board was
opposed to any limitation on re- designation, specifically one which is unlimited. The Board felt
that the current regulation (requiring a one year wait) is sufficient and that restricting designations
into the future is a denial of the preservation concept and contrary to the green movement which
encourages re -use of resources.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment to Section 20 -5.17 (F), as recommended by the
Planning Board be approved on first reading.
Backup Documentation:
Draft Ordinance
Planning Department Staff Report 5 -13 -08
Resolution No. 37 -08 -12634
LDC Section 20 -5.17
Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 5 -13 -08
Historic Preservation Board Minutes Excerpt 3 -31 -08
Public notices
SAY `
X: (Comm hemS1200816- 3- 081DC Amend Limits on Redesig CMReport.doc
I ORDINANCE NO.
2
3 A ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
4 MIAMI, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 -5.17
5 "DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC SITES" IN ORDER TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS ON
6 REINITIATING AN HISTORIC DESIGNATION WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
7 DENIED BY THE CITY COMMISSION;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
8 PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
9 EFFECTIVE DATE
10
11 WHEREAS, the Land Development Code (LDC) regulations set forth in Section 20 -5.17
12 currently provides a complete process for designation of historic sites or districts; and
13
14 WHEREAS, the Land Development Code does provide in Section 20 -5.8 (D) that a re- zoning
15 application if denied by the City Commission can not be reconsidered for one year, however, there
16 are no limitations after that time period; and
17
18 WHEREAS, the City Commission at its March 4, 2008, following a public hearing on the
19 re- designation of the Allen's Drug Store Building expressed concern that after a designation denial
20 by the Commission there were no limitations on the number of times a property could be
21 considered for re- designation; and
22
23 WHEREAS, the City Commission at its next meeting on March 18, 2008 adopted Resolution
24 No. 37 -08- 12634, sponsored by Vice Mayor Beasley, requesting the Planning Board to amend the
25 Land Development Code to limit the re- designation of a property if it has been denied by the City
26 Commission; and
27
28 WHEREAS, at the request of the City Commission the Planning Department prepared an
29 amendment to Land Development Code Section 20 -5.17 (F) limiting the re- designation of a
30 property if the designation had been denied by the City Commission; and
31
32 WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its May 13, 2008 meeting, after public hearing, approved a
33 motion by a vote of 5 ayes 0 nays recommending that a proposed amendment to Section 20-
34 5.17(F) the Land Development Code as set forth in this ordinance be adopted; and
35
36 WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendations of the Planning
37 Board and enact the aforesaid amendment.
38
39 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
40 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
41
42 Section 1. That Section 20 -5.17 of the Land Development Code is hereby amended to read as
43 follows:
44
45 Section 20- 5.17(F)
46
47
48 (F) City Commission Public Hearing.
49
50 (1) Public Hearing Requirement. The City Commission shall hold a public hearing,
51 pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 20- 5.5(G) and notice requirements of
52 subsection (2) and as required by the provisions of the City Charter, on each
53 proposed designation within sixty (60) calendar days of the recommendation by
54 the Historic Preservation Board and/or the filing of the completed designation
55 report.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
2
(2) Notice Requirement. At least ten (10) calendar days prior to the public hearing for,
each proposed designation of an individual site, district or zone, the Planning
Director shall mail a copy of the designation report to the owner at the address
listed on the most recent tax rolls as notification of the intent of the City
Commission to consider designation of the property.
(3) Objections. Upon notification, any owner of a property proposed for individual
designation who wishes to object shall submit to the City Clerk's Office a
notarized statement certifying the objection to the designation.
Reconsideration: A re- designation which has been denied by the City
Commission may only be reconsidered after five years or reinitiated at the
request of the property owner at any time.'
Section 2 All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are
hereby repealed.
Section 3 If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 4 This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
day of - - 52008
APPROVED:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
1 S` Reading —
2 "d Reading —
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM
CITY ATTORNEY
XAComm Items\2008 \6- 3 -08\LDC Amend Redesignation Ord.doc
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Feliu:
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Commissioner Wiscombe:
Commissioner Palmer:
Commissioner Beckman:
SO U T� South Miami
U
Al
All- America City
U
INCORPORATED
1927
A
�OR1�
2001
To: Honorable Chair and Date: May 13, 2008
Planning Board Members
From: Sanford A. Youkilis, AIC Re: LDC Amendment- Historic
Planning Director O Re- Designation Limitation
PB -08 -013
Applicant: City of South Miami.
A ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 -5.17 "DESIGNATION OF
HISTORIC SITES" IN ORDER TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS ON REINITIATING AN
HISTORIC DESIGNATION WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY DENIED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
LEGISLATION HISTORY
This item was before the Planning Board at its March 25, 2008 at which time the Board conducted a
public hearing and proposed a specific recommendation on the wording of the amendment. At a later
date, prior to its transmission to the City Commission, staff discovered that the proposed amendment had
been advertised as a resolution. An amendment to the Land Development Code must be done by
ordinance. In order to be technically correct the item is being brought back to the Planning Board for a
re- hearing and recommendation.
BACKGROUND
The Land Development Code (LDC) currently provides a complete process for designation of historic
sites or districts. This Section (20 -5.17) sets forth the procedures to be followed by the Historic
Preservation Board, the Planning Board and the City Commission. The final step in the process is the
adoption of an ordinance by the City Commission which designates a site historic and changes the
zoning on that property to HP- OV.(Overlay).
At its March 4, 2008 meeting, the City Commission considered on first reading the designation of the
Allen's Drug Store building. The designation process was actually a re- designation of the building
initiated by the Historic Board. The first designation was initiated by the Board in 2004.The City
Commission failed to adopt the designation in 2005. The City Commission at its meeting on March 4
also failed to adopt the second designation. There were comments made by the out of town property
owner that it was unfair to proceed with the designation a second time since his opposition position was
well known.
The City Commission at its next meeting adopted Resolution No. 37 -08- 12634, sponsored by Vice
Mayor Beasley, requesting the Planning Board to amend the Land Development Code to limit the re-
designation of a property if it has been denied by the City Commission.
LDC Amendment
May 13, 2008
Page 2 of 3
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
In order to implement this change the following amendment to Section 20 -5.17 (F) of the Code must be
made:
Section 20- 5.17(F)
(F) City Commission Public Hearing.
(1) Public Hearing Requirement. The City Commission shall hold a public hearing,
pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 20- 5.5(G) and notice requirements
of subsection (2) and as required by the provisions of the City Charter, on each
proposed designation within sixty (60) calendar days of the recommendation by
the Historic Preservation Board and/or the filing of the completed designation
report.
(2) Notice Requirement. At least ten (10) calendar days prior to the public hearing
for each proposed designation of an individual site, district or zone, the Planning
Director shall mail a copy of the designation report to the owner at the address
listed on the most recent tax rolls as notification of the intent of the City
Commission to consider designation of the property.
(3) Objections. Upon notification, any owner of a property proposed for individual
designation who wishes to object shall submit to the City Clerk's Office a
notarized statement certifying the objection to the designation.
(4) "(4) Reconsideration: A re- designation which has been denied by the City Commission
may only be reconsidered after five years or reinitiated at the request of the property
owner at any time. "
The above wording was agreed upon by the Planning Board at its March 25, 2008 meeting. A motion
was adopted by a vote of 6 ayes 1 nay (Mr. Morton) recommending that the above wording be
transmitted to the City Commission.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMENTS
The re- hearing of this item will allow the Board to consider the comments of the Historic Preservation
Board on the subject amendment. The Historic Board at its March 31, 2008 meeting felt the obligation to
comment upon the pending amendment. A motion was passed by unanimous vote that the Board was
opposed to any limitation on re- designation, specifically one which is unlimited. The Board felt that the
current regulation (requiring a one year wait) is sufficient and that restricting designations into the future
is a denial of the preservation concept and contrary to the green movement which encourages re -use of
resources.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment as adopted by the Planning Board on March 25, 2008
should again be recommended for approval.
LDC Amendment
May 13, 2008
Page 3 of 3
Attachments:
LDC Section 20 -5.17
Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 3 -25 -08
Historic Board Minutes Excerpt 3-31-08
Public Notices
SAY
X:\PB\PB Agendas StaffReports\2008 Agendas Staff Reports \5- 13- 08\PB -07- -016 LDC Amend Limits on Re- Desig.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 37-08-12634
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, DIRECTING THE PLANNING BOARD TO CONSIDER AMENDING
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 -5.17 "DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC
SITES" IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THAT ONCE AN HISTORIC DESIGNATION
PROPOSAL IS DENIED BY THE CITY COMMISSION THE DESIGNATION CAN
ONLY BE REINITIATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 20 -5.17 of the Land development Code provides that
historic designations can be proposed by property owners, members of the Historic
Preservation Board, the ERPB, the City Commission, and the City Administration; and
WHEREAS, in certain cases property owners are opposed to the historic
designation of their property and may expend time and resources in order to make their
position known; and
WHEREAS, the Land Development Code does not provide regulations
governing the number of times a proposed historic designation can be considered, which
can result in a hardship to a property owner who has previously expressed opposition to
the designation of their property; and
- WHEREAS, Section 20 -5.17 of the Land development Code also provides that
the final determination on a proposed historic designation is made by the City
Commission.; and
WHEREAS, the denial of a proposed historic designation by the City
Commission should be considered final and no further proposals to designate the same
property by City Boards or personnel should be initiated; providing that a property
owner shall not be prevented from reinitiating the historic designation of their property.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. In order to amend the Land Development Code the Planning
Department and the Planning Board are hereby directed 'to draft and process the
appropriate amendment to provide that the denial of a proposed historic designation by
the City Commission should be considered final and no further proposals to designate the
same property by City Boards or personnel should be initiated; providing that a property
owner shall not be prevented from reinitiating the historic designation of their property.
Section 2. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon being approved.
Res. No. 37 -08 -12634
lG(,i� (2)
PASSED AND ADOPTED this/0 , day of March, 2008:
ATTEST:
Q."
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CIT TORNEY
APPROVED:
X: \Comm Items\2008\3- 18- 08\LDC Amend Resol on Limit Hist desig.doc
Commission Vote:
Mayor Feliu:
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Commissioner Wiscombe:
Commissioner Palmer:
Commissioner Beckman:
2
Mil
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
20 -5.16 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE /
hearing, and executed by the City Manager and City Clerk. The release of the Unity
of Title is contingent upon a cessation of the conditions and/or criteria which originally
required the execution of the subject Unity of Title.
(Ord. No. 23 -99 -1697, § 2, 11- 16 -99)
20 -5.17 Designation of historic sites.
(A) Report Required. Prior to the designation of an individual historic or archeological site,
an investigation and formal designation report must be filed with the Historic Preservation
Board.
(B) Historic Preservation Board Recommendation. The Historic Preservation Board shall
make recommendations to the City Commission concerning all properties proposed as historic
sites, districts or archeological zones.
(C) Proposals and Preliminary Evaluation and Recommendation.
(1) Application for designation of individual properties and districts may be made to the
Planning Department by any member of the Historic Preservation Board, the
Environmental Review and Preservation Board, the City Commission, the City
administration or the property owner(s) of the subject property for designation.
(2) The Historic Preservation Board shall conduct a preliminary evaluation of available
data for conformance with the criteria set forth herein and may direct the preparation
of a formal designation report by one of the members of the board. The Historic
Preservation Board may then meet as a body and develop recommendations to
transmit to the City Commission regarding designations.
(D) Historic Preservation Board Findings.
(1) If the board finds that the proposed designation meets the intent and criteria set forth
in this Code, it shall transmit such recommendation to the Planning Board and City
Commission with the designation report and any additions or modifications deemed
appropriate.
(2) If the board finds that the proposed designation does not meet the intent and criteria
in this Code, no further action shall be required, except that the board's action may be
appealed in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
(E) Planning Board Review.
(1) Following a favorable recommendation by the Historic Preservation Board, a proposed
designation shall be implemented by the adoption of an "HP -OV" Historic Preservation
Overlay zone for the property set forth in the historic designation report.
(2) The Planning Board shall determine if the designation is compatible with the goals
and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and if the proposed historic site and/or district
regulations would change any existing zoning district regulations such as, for example,
permitted use, height, floor area ratio, yard setbacks or off- street parking. The review
Errata 126
PROCEDURES AND APPLICATIONS 20 -5.19
shall be pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 20 -5.5, Applications requiring
public hearings. The recommendation of the Planning Board on the proposed desig-
nation shall be transmitted to the City Commission.
(F) City Commission Public Hearing.
(1) Public Hearing Requirement. The City Commission shall hold a public hearing,
pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 20- 5.5(G) and notice requirements of
subsection (2) and as required by the provisions of the City Charter, on each proposed
designation within sixty (60) calendar days of the recommendation by the Historic
Preservation Board and/or the filing of the completed designation report.
(2) Notice Requirement. At least ten (10) calendar days prior to the public hearing for each
proposed designation of an individual site, district or zone, the Planning Director shall
mail a copy of the designation report to the owner at the address listed on the most
recent tax rolls as notification of the intent of the City Commission to consider
designation of the property.
(3) Objections. Upon notification, any owner of a property proposed for individual
designation who wishes to object shall submit to the City Clerk's Office a notarized
statement certifying the objection to the designation.
(Ord. No. 12 -96 -1612, § 3, 7- 30 -96; Ord. No. 11 -04 -1818, § 2, 10 -5 -04)
20 -5.18 Historic designation reports.
(A) Report Format and Contents. Report format designating historic or archeological sites
may vary according to the type of designation. All reports shall address the following:
(1) Historical, cultural, architectural and archeological significance of the property or
properties being recommended for designation;
(2) Projected, proposed or existing public improvements and developmental or renewal
plans;
(3) Boundary recommendations for historic districts and archeological zones and identi-
fication of boundaries of individual sites being designated; and
(4) A signed and sealed survey of the subject property by a registered surveyor.
(B). Nonconforming Properties. Where a report is filed recommending designation of a
district, the report must identify those properties, if any, within the district which are not
historically or architecturally compatible with structures in the district, and such report shall
provide standards for regulating such nonconforming properties.
(Ord. No. 12 -96 -1612, § 4, 7- 30 -96)
20 -5.19 Demolition of designated sites; demolition by neglect and certificates of
appropriateness.
(A) Order Required. Demolition of a designated building, structure, improvement, or site
may only occur pursuant to an order of a governmental agency or a court of competent
jurisdiction or pursuant to an approved application by the owner. Demolition by neglect or
Errata 127
OUTS
CORPORATE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
City Commission Chambers
7:30 PM
EXCERPT
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
H. Administration: Mr. Comendeiro was dully sworn in as a member of the Planning Board.
III. Roll Call: Chairman Morton requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Morton, Ms. Young, Mr. Farfan, and Mr. Cruz
and Mr. Comendeiro. Absent: Ms. Chael and Ms. Yates.
City staff present: Sanford A. Youkilis (Acting Planning Director), Stephen David, (CRA
Director), and Lluvia Resendiz (Administrative Assistant).
IV. Planning Board Applications/Public Hearing
PB -08 -013
Applicant: City of South Miami.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20 -5.17
"DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC SITES" IN ORDER TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS ON
REINITIATING, AN HISTORIC DESIGNATION WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
DENIED BY THE CITY COMMISSION;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the item into the record.
Mr. Youkilis advised that this item was before the Planning Board at its March 25, 2008 at which
time the Board conducted a public hearing and proposed a specific recommendation on the
wording of the amendment. Prior to its transmission to the City Commission, staff discovered that
the proposed amendment was advertised as a resolution. An amendment to the LDC must be done
by ordinance. In order correct the technicality this item is being brought back to the Planning Board
for a re- hearing and recommendation. Mr. Youkilis recommended that the Board re -adopt its
recommendation made on March 25, 2008, where the Board approved wording that a denied
historic re- designation cannot be re- introduced for a five year period. The amendment also added
that the property owner could ask for designation at any time. The re- hearing of this item allows
the Board to consider the comments of the Historic Preservation Board on the subject amendment.
The Historic Board at its March 31, 2008 meeting felt the obligation to comment upon
Planning Board Meeting
May 13, 2008
Page 2 of 2
the pending amendment. A motion was passed by unanimous vote that the Board was opposed to
any limitation on re- designation, specifically one which is unlimited. The Board felt that the
current regulation (requiring a one year wait) is sufficient and that restricting designations into the
future is a denial of the preservation concept and contrary to the green movement which
encourages re -use of resources.
Without discussion Chairperson opened the public hearing and without any interested parties
Chairperson closed the public hearing.
Motion: Ms. Young moved to approve the proposed text amendment to the Land Development
Code concerning the re- designation of an historic site and Mr. Cruz seconded.
Vote: 5 Ayes 0 Nays
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
Monday, March 31, 2008
City Commission Chambers
7:30 PM
EXCERPT
I. Call to order: Ms. Clyatt called the meeting to order at 7:24 p.m.
II. Roll Call: Roll call was performed. Board members present constituting a quorum: Ms.
Clyatt, Ms. Dison, Ms. Lahiff, Mr. Ruiz de Castilla, Ms. Shelley, Mr. Hochstim, and Mr.
Kurtzman.
Board members absent: and Mr. LaMonica
City staff present: Sanford A. Youkilis (Acting Planning Director), Lluvia Resendiz
(Administrative Assistant)
III. Administration
Mr. Youkilis advised he will be attending the American Planning Association national conference the
week of April 28, 2008 and requested that the meeting be rescheduled from Monday, April 28 to April
21, 2008 and the Board agreed. He provided the Board with a sheet illustrating the total number of
properties already designated historic. There are 42 historic designation sites, 40 of which have been
designated by this Board during the last three years. A listing of the addresses in numerical order was
prepared for reference by City employees who work in permitting and plan review.
Mr. Youkilis advised that Vice Mayor Beasley directed the Planning Board to initiate the procedure to
change the process of an historic designation. Resolution No. 37 -08 -12634 requests that a text
amendment to the LDC be prepared indicating that after an historic designation is denied by the City
Commission it cannot be re- designated unless it is at the choice of the property owner. This was initiated
due to the fact that the owner of Allen's Drug Store was present at the time that site's public hearing for
historic designation was held. The owner complained it was unfair that on two occasions he had to
return from Arizona just to oppose the designation. The Planning Board agreed that the re- designation
should be limited but that there should be a time limit, such as five years.
The Historic Board members felt that the proposed amendment was a rebuke to the Historic Board. Mr.
Kurtzman questioned if the City Commission read the detailed research that has been acquired over the
past three years. Mr. Youkilis replied in the affirmative adding that all designation reports were provided
to the City Commission at the time of their public hearing.
Mr. Hochstim questioned the precedence that other municipalities follow. Mr. Ruiz de Castilla advised
that he spoke to a Coral Gables resident and indicated that the City of Coral Gables considers historic
designations an important procedure in the city, thus would never consider such an amendment. He
added that the City of Coral Gables may overrule the owner if a property is deemed important to the
culture and the history of the City and that many residents in Coral Gables like being designated because
they get incentives. Mr. Youkilis advised that in South Miami the City Commission can approve a
designation even if the owner files a written opposition, however, with a written opposition statement a
HPB Minutes
March 31, 2008 Excerpt
Page 2 of 2
4 -5 vote is required. He added that in most local governments a historic designation is a zone change and
there is a section in the LDC stating that if a zone change fails there is a one year wait before it comes
back to the City Commission.
Mr. Kurtzman expressed concerns that the current City Commission does not envision a future that
would ever entertain the possibility of a City Commission overriding a property owner even if the
property is deemed to possess significant historic. He felt that this Commission would never approve a
Board's recommendation over any property owner rights. He expressed strong feelings that the proposed
text amendment was a rebuke to the Board.
Mr. Youkilis advised that the owner of the Allen's Drug Store property indicated that in the future he
wants to remove the building and develop it in conjunction with the shopping center adjacent to it. Mr.
Youkilis added that the owner stated he was against any regulations related to his property. Ms. Shelley
indicated that the owner must still comply with other rules and therefore it makes no sense to say he does
not want any regulations.
Ms. Lahiff stated that the sign in the corner is important and therefore it should be kept in that location
and questioned if the sign alone may be designated. Mr. Youkilis advised that the historic designation
must be on the building as a whole.
Mr. Hochstim advised that it is inappropriate to create an LDC text amendment against the historic
designation or what this Board considers historic significance. He expressed strong reservations and
stated that the Board should not compromise for five years. Mr. Hochstim along with Mr. Kurtzman
questioned if they may address the City Commission. The Board felt that as Board members they should
have the same privilege of addressing the City Commission as all other South Miami residents. Mr.
Youkilis replied that he will verify with the City Attorney to ensure their presence before the City
Commission will not violate any code of ethics.
Motion: Mr. Ruiz de Castilla moved that the Board is opposed to any limitations on re- designating an
historic property. They Board agreed to continue practicing the current Historic Preservation Board
regulations under of the LDC. Mr. Hochstim seconded. Mr. Kurtzman added that history is dynamic and
it takes place daily therefore any ordinance restricting the future historic significance of something
determined today denies the entire purpose of the Historic Preservation Board. The Board felt that the
current regulation (requiring a one year wait) is sufficient and that restricting designations into the future
is a denial of the preservation concept and contrary to the green movement which encourages re -use of
resources.
Vote: 7 Ayes 0 Nays
Mr. Kurtzman requested that Mr. Youkilis verify whether or not he may address the City Commission
regarding the issue. Should he not have the privilege of addressing the Commission he would choose to
resign from the Board in order to exercise his privilege as a regular South Miami resident. If he must
resign Mr. Kurtzman requested to know the time period to render his resignation in order to address the
Commission. Mr. Youkilis advised he would contact the Attorney.
X:\PB \PB Agendas Staff Reports\2008 Agendas Staff Reports\ 5- 13- 08\HPB- Mins- 03 -31 -08 Excerpt. doc