Loading...
2024-1-17 HPB MINUTES 1 Mayor George Burch Vice Mayor Jesse Valinsky Councilmember Jerome Charles Councilmember Sandra Harris Esmond Scott, Village Manager Sarah Johnston, Village Attorney Ysabely Rodriguez, Village Clerk HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING MINUTES January 17, 2024 6:30pm COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1) CALL TO ORDER – By Chair Ms. Bonaduce at 6:30pm 2) ROLL CALL Present: Mr. Saadeh Chair Bonaduce Ms. Headley (On the phone) Mr. Serrano Absent: Mr. Bramson Also, present: Mr. Esmond Scott –Village Manager Ms. Michelle Brown –Brockway Memorial Library Director Mr. Alex David – Interim Planning and Zoning Director (CGA Consultants) Ms. Alizgreeth Tezen -Planning and Zoning Technician 3) MINUTE(S) 3.A Approval of the Minutes for November 15th, 2023 Motion to approve by Mr. Saadeh, seconded by Mr. Serrano. 3-0. HPB_Minutes_11_15_23.pdf 4) ACTION ITEM(S) 4.A Chapter 11- Historic Preservation: Establishing a Village Historic Marker Program Owner: Warren Bittner Request: Seeking approved language of proposed historic marker. 2 Mr. Bittner (Spoke at the podium) 287 NE 96th ST. Mr. Bittner has been the owner of the home located 287 NE 96th ST. for 26 years, and his intention is to place a historic marker, with the assistance of Mr. Bachay to create a program for local markers to have a criteria for the design and text for the Historic Markers. Mr. Bittner added that based on his research on several houses in the area that are designated, the marker will be specific to Miami Shores Village and create a language that can be adopted by Sec. 16-89 Miami-Dade County Code in the section it gives the powers and duties to Miami-Dade County Historic Preservation Board, to approve and authorize historical markers. Mr. David asked what section in the code it show that the historic preservation board of Miami-Dade County has the authority to approve the language for the marker? To which Mr. Bittner reiterated that it can be found in Sec. 16-89. Subsection 4. Mr. Bittner gave his proposal on the historic marker and provided the insight of what the criteria can be and what the program would consist of. The main reason why Mr. Bittner’s reason as to why the program would make more sense to use versus continuing on with the state’s it do to the fact that it provides a direct connection with the history of Miami Shores Village and it will be able to be done with the available local resources; zoning and historic designation items per the home rule which is the ability to establish a form of government through its charter and to then enact ordinances, codes, plans, and resolutions without prior state approval. Mr. Bittner provided a proposal to amend the existing language that Miami Shores Village has in place and request to Village Council to establish a local marker program as it has many incentives for the residents to have input on the design as well as create a desire to designate homes that are eligible for such. Also, markers that are purchase by the home owners themselves would still be property of the state however with this program the marker will be the homeowner’s property. Chair Ms. Bonaduce had a concern whether the owner applicant would have issues getting a state marker with this new village marker? Mr. Bittner stated that the proposed marker will have a criteria based on what the board will decide on. The one from the state is less of a criteria than the one that is being proposed. Chair Ms. Bonaduce added that state markers don’t seem that they would be suited for residential areas but more for a library, village hall, or other building with commercial or historical significance and that the residential ones should have a different state marker for homes in particular. Mr. Saadeh stated that his concern with this program is going to confuse residents with two different markers one from the local level and one from the state. Mr. Bittner showed the South Dakota pattern design which is similar to the one on the bay as an example that can be part of the criteria with the program. Mr. David stated that Mr. Bittner is correct about the historic preservation board has no authority to approve language, and the recommendation is to modify the current language on the code or continue with the proposed language but it will be a lengthy process which will require several readings with Village Council to have it be amended. Another thing that Mr. David added that the placement of the marker is important to ensure that those that want to visit the maker know where to located and that it is not turned incorrectly or become an issue for record keeping. There has been a concern on the lengthy process from the state due to various factors from the delay in supplies to create the markers, the manufacture, etc. The state wants to just keep track of the location of the historic markers and not necessarily the content, per Mr. Bachay. Mr. Saadeh asked what happens to the marker is the homeowner decides to sell the house? Mr. Bittner stated that the next property owner owns the sign. How can you enforce the sign if it belongs to them. W hat if the homeowner wants to keep it as a souvenir? Then there can be some criteria in order to have maintenance for when that does happen, Mr. Serrano added. Some properties currently do not have a signed covenant and it is going 3 to raise a concern for excluding them from the criteria. Chair Ms. Bonaduce had a question about accessing historical files. In the past, in the year 2000 Mr. Bittner was able to access old files and needed to know the process on how applicants that request a certificate of appropriateness and a centennial house floor plan is needed to evaluate the change, how is someone from the board or the applicants themselves able to retrieve those plans at that time? Mr. Bittner stated that in the past the Village Hall had file cabinets with the file of each home and you would be able to access the files directly when need be. However some home plans would not be able to be found do to how some of the plans were with the City of Miami prior of being incorporated. The early houses of the Shoreland Company were available and the later houses the plans and permits use to be in Village Hall but were badly scanned and discarded per Chair Ms. Bonaduce. The differential is that the residential properties will be the local marker and the commercial or other properties will only be allowed from the state. Mr. Bittner provided the board a copy of the state program which shows the provisions on what the applicant would have to provide when applying for the marker in comparison to the proposal. Motion to table by the Mr. Saadeh, seconded by Mr. Serrano. 3-0. Separate the next agenda items, one the approval for recommendation for the Village Marker Program to Village Council and the Certificate of Appropriateness for the language on the marker itself. 287 NE 96th ST- Certificate of Appropriateness.pdf 287 NE 96th ST- Site Plan Review Package.pdf 4.B Certificate of Appropriateness- 284 NE 96th ST. Owner: Todd Leoni Request: Removal of a wall. Ms. Headley asked about this property not matching the material to what they originally requested to. The stucco does not match the rest of the stucco to the original house and the concern of the board is what does the Village do when an applicant does not comply to the conditions that are set forth on a certificate of appropriateness? Chair Ms. Bonaduce is requesting to inspect if the certificate of appropriateness condition was completed. Ms. Tezen read out the date that the certificate of appropriateness was approved for in 12.20.21 which conditioned the applicant to match stucco with hand- made craft to match original. Mr. Saadeh stated that the applicant should have been required to do the work prior to receiving the certificate of re-occupancy. Mr. Saadeh stated that the building department would be responsible to reinforcing those conditions. Mr. Saadeh stated that as a recourse to remove the designation to those who do not follow the conditions of the historic certificate of appropriateness. Chair Ms. Bonaduce asked could this be a topic of discussion for the next meeting? Ms. Headley stated that a condition to the new request to remove the wall, the applicant would have to correct the stucco from the previous certificate of appropriateness request. Chair Ms. Bonaduce requested to add as a discussion item to go over the compliance of certificate of appropriateness in 12.20.21. Mr. Saadeh stated that it would be fair to let applicant know that the item will be discussed and inspected to ensure that the correct stucco was placed. Mr. Saadeh asked about having the building official stop by and give insight on items regarding homes that have gone to get a demo permit or been altered without going to the Historic Preservation Board for review. Mr. Saadeh also added on how inspections are done and items are enforced with the conditions of the certificate of appropriateness. 4 Motion to table by Chair Ms. Bonaduce. 3-0. Motion by Mr. Saadeh to invite the head of the building department to come and talk about certificate of appropriateness, Seconded by Mr. Serrano. 3-0. 5) DISCUSSION ITEM(S) 5.A Ms. Frehling Plaque Update The ideal dates for the unveiling date is the follow: Thursdays 14th, 21st of March. 5.B Library Marker Update Ms. Tezen brought up to the board that the Library Marker Application was sent to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historic Preservation Historical Markers and waiting on any feedback that the state might request from the Village later down the line. 6) PUBLIC COMMENT- 2 MINUTE LIMIT 7) BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Motion to propose Mr. John Bachay as an advisor to the Historic Preservation Board. Mr. Bachay will serve as a resource and counselor for anything that the Historic Preservation Board will need. Ms. Headley stated that she will not be able to attend the meeting in-person and she would be able to call in. Ms. Tezen brought up that in order for the board to have quorum all minimum 3 members need to be present. 8) NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING - FEBRUARY 21, 2024 9) ADJOURNMENT -motion to adjourn by Mr. Saadeh, Seconded by Mr. Serrano 9:00pm The board may consider and act upon such other business as may come before it. In the event this agenda must be revised, such revised copies will be available to the public at Village Hall. Pursuant to Chapter 286.0105, Florida Statutes, if a person decides to appeal any matter considered at such meeting or hearin g, the individual may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record inc ludes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Miami Shores Village complies with the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act. If you are a disabled person requirin g any accommodations or assistance, including materials in accessible format, a sign language interpreter, or assistive listening devices, please notify the Village Clerk's office of such need at least 5 days in advance. In accordance with Village Code and section 2 -11.1(s) of the Miami-Dade County Code, any person engaging in lobbying activities, as defined therein, must register at the Village Clerk’s Office before addressing said board.