Loading...
Minutes 05-23-22 Minutes of the Historic Resources Preservation Board Meeting Held on May 23, 2022, at 6:30 p.m. in City Hall Commission Chambers 100 E. Ocean Avenue, Boynton Beach, Florida Present: Barbara Ready, Chair Mike Rumpf, Deputy Director of Development Tom Ramiccio Craig Pinder, Planner II Dr. Ben Lowe Michael Wilson Absent: Bernard Wright Rhonda Sexton 1. Call to Order Chair Ready called the meeting to Order at 6:36 p.m. 2. Agenda Approval Chair Ready requested hearing Item 6 before Old Business. Motion Mr. Ramiccio so moved. Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. Approval of Minutes — April 11, 2022 Motion Mr. Ramiccio moved to approve the minutes as presented. Dr. Lowe seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. Communications and Announcements (next meeting — discuss selection of priority potential historic sites) Mike Rumpf, Board Liaison, stated that the amendments to the Historic Resource Preservation Ordinance and zoning regulations are halfway through the process. He mentioned that the First Reading was approved at the last City Commission meeting and Second Reading will occur on June 7t". He said that he will promote subsequent amendments pertaining to accessory dwelling units and they also had a workshop about affordable housing. Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 6. Local Designation of 330 NW 1st Avenue — Request for designation of 33 NW 1St Avenue, and the addition of this 1924, Mission Style, one-story single-family house to the City's Local Registry of Historic Sites. Applicant: Edward J. Bradley, property owner. (Heard out of Order) Mr. Rumpf advised that the applicant, Mr. Brady, was present and this would be the first designation, and likely approval, in several years, given the status of the house and the outcome of the consultants review of the designation criteria. He said that the prior owner was Susan J. Mize and the property is known as the Susan J. Mize House, according to the Florida State Site File form recorded in the past. He stated that it is an owner-initiated application, and staff worked diligently with Mr. Bradley on the application. He noted that if any of the members have driven by, they had a site sign on the premises and they hope to recycle the sign for other property notifications. He indicated that there were no significant changes to the exterior and said that the property was built circa 1924, but the Property Appraiser's site says 1920 and that the property is among the earliest homes built during the Boom-Time era, It has retained much of its integrity. Edward Bradley, the homeowner, commended the Board on preserving the heritage in the area and thought that the character in the community is wonderful, which is why he fell in love with the home and bought it. He explained that currently it looks the same as in 1994, but it is painted a different color and it has one, two-feet by two-feet closet and one bathroom which is bigger than the closet. They want to construct an addition, while preserving the character of the house and they met with the architect and the front of the home will not be changed. He said that they will build a one-story addition in the back, slightly separated, that will be compatible. He pointed out that he had drawings of the addition the Board viewed and hoped they could work with the City to preserve it with the additional bathroom and closets. Mr. Ramicco thanked Mr. Bradley for preserving the home and said that the addition will be the exact same height and elevation, and the parapet wall will remain. He noted that one would be able to distinguish the original home from the addition and that they also planned to add a swimming pool, and that the home has Pecky Cypress ceilings. Mr. Rumpf had mentioned the Ad Valorem Tax Credit program to Mr. Bradley. He stated that the concessions and new amendments to the Ordinance will help Mr. Bradley, because it is a small lot and they would need a variance on the minimum lot coverage. Mr. Ramiccio questioned if they could get a special exception or variance on the minimum lot coverage. Mr. Rumpf responded that the property came along well timed as the amendments would help. He explained that they would make exception for historic properties to have different lot standards, instead of promoting variances, it would not go through site plan review, but would go through the Certificate of Appropriateness process. Motion Mr. Ramiccio moved approval of Item 6A which. Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2 Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 5. Old Business: Historic Preservation Programming and the local Ordinance—The Board will be guided in a discussion on identifying and establishing a list of "priority historic sites" in conjunction with the pending related amendments to the Land Development Regulations offered the opportunity to continue any discussions regarding desired preservation activities and programming, necessary resources and scheduling. Mr. Rumpf advised that he will keep this item on the agenda as they continue brainstorming, so that as the list and amendments are developed, they can tweak them and adjust as needed. He said that the catalyst that started the process was demolition and that applications undergo a thorough review and the process only applies to designated properties. He discussed the possibility of having a set of priority sites and he noted that Work Plan Priority 4, having to do with program education, dealt with the Board coming up with a top 10 list. He commented there are over 120 potential sites on the 1996 inventory list, and the regulations could be amended to reference the priority list or registry, so that if one of those properties were subject to demolition, they can halt the process, which is written in the Code now. He proposed optional titles and stated that those provisions are in the draft regulations. He also included about 35 sites eligible for designation, which were provided by the consultant. Mr. Ramiccio explained that when he joined the Board, he was concerned about the process they had to designate demolitions. He said that currently the process is that the property has to be designated to be protected and there are many more homes that would be in the process. He suggested that since the list would not be static and would be reviewed every few years, that they look at all the homes currently in the categories of being constructed in the 30's and 40's and designating them all for the purposes of having a demolition review. He mentioned that this designation would not necessarily be for homes with a historic designation. It would be for demolition review only. He thought a cursory review, even at a staff level, would be awesome and that by looking at the age and style of the existing property, they can say whether the home could be protected. He hoped this item would be approved at this meeting, and suggested taking all of the properties in the Registry and designating them for demolition review, only in that age category or other categories, as they may be able to proceed to obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Rumpf noted that there are two lists. One list is of the 96 inventory, and the shorter list is from when the consultant saw those properties as eligible for designation. Chair Ready asked if there would it be a lot of paperwork to do what Mr. Ramiccio proposed. Mr. Rumpf indicated that the City would just bundle them, but there was nothing preventing them from making a recommendation, through staff to the City Commission, to lower the bar, thereby making more homes eligible. He said that there are no penalties for being on the list, as it only pertained to educating those property owners and he thought education was important because there are a lot of homeowners that do not know they could get hurricane impact windows or put in a pool or add an addition. He 3 Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 commented there is a way to finesse the program, so people would want to come in, buy a historic home, and make the alterations they want. He indicated some of these neighborhoods could be improved through the Paint-Up, Fix-Up Paving and Landscaping program, and they could go block by block and neighborhood by neighborhood. Chair Ready thought two lists may be needed, and that the homes on the list are in good repair, but that would be quite a task because they are starting with older properties. She thought it would be beneficial for the Board to have its own endangered list of homes that are in disrepair. She said that they could conduct a search and if the home is in the Code Enforcement process, they could remove them and see what assistance they can offer. Dr. Lowe asked if any of the subject properties have been purchased by developers as they think about demolition and redevelopment. Mr. Rumpf responded that they have not, but staff needs direction from this Board. Dr. Lowe thought they should prioritize homes based on the possibility of imminent demolition, and there should be some type of assessment for that. Mr. Rumpf conveyed that there is no perfect real time information. that they could look at the current information of the properties being sold in the City and see the commonality of owners. Chair Ready explained that when the changes were made, one big change was following Boynton Beach Boulevard east from 95. Some houses on one side of the street are part of a potential historic district, and some areas on both sides of the street were rezoned for redevelopment and all of the little historic homes are endangered. He mentioned that it was a recommendation to the CRA for mixed-use zoning extending to the full block for redevelopment. Mr. Ramiccio thought that there may be a change on the City Commission and they may be open to protecting homes built in a certain year and some properties may not be included so as to not cause a conflict going forward. He stated that he was aware there was a huge amount of interest within a two-mile radius of City Hall and that something is going to happen. He suggested that if the Board wants to preserve some of the neighborhood, there should be more effort other than taking a picture of the homes and putting them in a file. He noted that he was worried about the next wave of redevelopment. Mr. Ramiccio reported that other cities have protections, but Boynton does not. Dr. Lowe pointed out that all these transactions are being bought up for commercial development. Mr. Ramiccio stated that some buyers would be individual investors, but usually this predicates assemblage and right now, all of the land banking would be under the current Code. He said that he wants to catch the demolition part before the homes disappear. Dr. Lowe noted that homes built in the 60s, by his home, are being demolished, redeveloped and there is a surge to build closer to the ocean. He thought that there would be a shortage of homes from the 60s and 70s and the Board needs to look at the different home designs. Chair Ready expressed that the Ordinance does not stop anyone, but it slows them down or talks them out of demolition. Mr. Ramicco suggested that the Board should find out what they really want to do with Historic Preservation and focus on that and if there is no support, there is no support Mr. Rumpf advised that regardless of how many homes, they will use the same language and intent of the Ordinance and the way it is written right now, it would not matter which list they would use as a base. He stated the Board would need rules and he understood that if they are going to halt a demolition, 4 Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 require them to take certain steps, and if they are going to use the same standards as if the home was designated, it would be pretty intense. He commented that it would require permit documents and drawings of what would be constructed in its place and the list would be approved by the City Commission via Ordinance, which is what Mr. Bradley's property would go through and the Board will need to determine what steps the next group of priority homes will need for designation. He said that if using the same requirement, it may be something the Commission will approve through the process, or maybe not. He noted that maybe it is a temporary halting of it, or a subset of review requirements and that is why they say a local designation is more preserving of a property than a national designation. He noted that if applying the Secretary of the Interior's requirements for modifying historic structures, then they do, but the State's process does not apply to this degree, to prevent something from being demolished or reviewing a Certificate of Appropriateness. He said that it is just local and those get approved via Ordinance by the City Commission. He inquired what would they mandate on the priority list they are going to create and if it is those same steps, Mr. Rumpf will have to think through what the process would be to officially designate that priority list. Mr. Ramiccio said that he saw those as steps for designation and thought it would be too cumbersome for staff and the City Commission to review. He thought that there was a request for demolition within a certain age and characteristic they identified, they would just take a look at them and if it warrants a closer look, then staff could require a second step to provide a report. Mr. Rumpf explained that the Ordinance has a quick relief valve and there is no reason go through this process if not really warranted. Mr. Ramiccio commented that some cities have a number of demolitions and if a developer acquires the entire street, it would be good for the Board to know what it will be replaced with. Mr. Rumpf explained that would only occur with designated properties. Dr. Lowe asked if there was something the Board could do to slow down demolition based on Mr. Ramiccio's idea and learned there was, but it will take longer. He said that the Board can shorten the list of homes by focusing on certain dates. He asked if Delray Beach created a city-wide district and if they always had this process. Mr. Rumpf did not know the answer and he mentioned Delray Beach is not protecting their own homes. He thought they could go with what staff drafted. He commented if they have 127 sites, staff will determine which homes were demolished and review each one to see if they generally meet the criteria and if it was 40 sites, it would be done faster. He stated that it would be a separate process to go on the Local Register and this only creates a priority list, but the first step is to see what homes on the list are still in existence. He noted that Priority 4 involves soliciting the property owners, and educating them as to the process and the benefits and the list is composed of properties eligible for local designation. He said that if the property is 50 years old or older, the property will be eligible for designation or review and that list was compiled by the consultant in 1996. Brief discussion followed about Leisureville and he mentioned that most Homeowners' Associations have design review boards and the Leisureville homes look the same way as when they were constructed. There was consensus to compile a list of properties eligible for designation. Dr. Lowe remarked that there is only one bungalow home in Boynton Beach on Federal Highway and it needs to be saved. 5 Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 Chair Ready indicated the woman who owns Audrey Gerger's historic home, Ms. Ridley, called her and said that she wants to demolish the garage and does not want to replace it. She said Ms. Ridley has been given an estimate, which she feels is too high, but the electricity for her property is accessed through the garage and that she will need an electrician to move the electric from the back of the garage to the back of the house. Mr. Rumpf explained what Chair Ready stated sounds similar, but he was unaware of electrical routing and he was not sure where that plays in. He mentioned that the garage is in a dilapidated condition, needs a lot of repairs and it is a very small home, as it tends to be the case with historic homes. She wants to expand the home in the back. Mr. Rumpf met with Ms. Ridley and her contractor about the expansion and at the end of the meeting he explained the regulations would greatly benefit her. He explained to her that her property is a non-conforming use as a duplex in a single-family zoning district and strict adherence to the Code would prohibit someone from exceeding a dollar threshold in investment or maintenance and would not allow it to be expanded. He commented that without the pending regulations, she cannot expand her property and at the end of meeting they may put the garage on hold and would look more seriously into expanding the home if the regulations were approved. Discussion followed regarding what the funds she spent inside the building had to do with the garage. Mr. Rumpf responded that they do not review interior improvements, but work was done without permits and she has to experience the consequences that while plumbing was being conducted, electrical issues surfaced. He said that Ms. Ridley was frustrated with the permitting process and that Historic designation was available, but she misunderstood the process or she would not be experiencing these issues. He advised that the garage was not a contributing element towards designation of the home. 6. New Business: Local Designation of 330 NW 1st Avenue — Request for designation of 330 NW 1 st Avenue, and the addition of this 1924, Mission Style, one-story single-family house to the City's Local Registry of Historic Sites. Applicant: Edward J. Bradley, property owner. This item was heard earlier in the meeting. 7. Other: Training Topic — Guidelines for compatible expansions of historic buildings — Historically-designated properties can be improved and expanded to meet common and special needs of the owners, consistent with standards and guidelines that ensure that the contributing elements are aa. Can do quite a bit of modern appliances. Mr. Rumpf thought that this was a timely item and that the review process of a historically modified building was an interesting topic. He stated an excerpt was in the meeting backup and was contained in the Historic Preservation Program Design 6 Meeting Minutes Historic Resource Preservation Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2022 guidelines. He explained that it has the criteria to modify historic structures, define replacement materials for windows, doors, roofs and siding. He mentioned that one topic is expanding structures, which is important because in promoting the program, the impression often perceived, is that if they designate the property, the property owner's use of the building would be controlled, perhaps to an undesirable level and staff sought to eliminate some of the myths. He indicated that this is a top expert review and graphic examples can show how large institutional historically designated buildings were significantly expanded. He said that the Secretary of the Interior standards allow it to be compatible, but not identical and that when people view the structure, they can discern the old and the new. He elaborated that if it is not visible, or is behind a gate or behind the property, that criteria is not as significant and regulations allow for homes to be modernized with appliances or solar or dish amenities. He explained that Mr. Bradley's addition and swimming pool modifications will come before the Board and he will wait until designated before applying for the Certificate of Appropriateness, and the designation has to go before the City Commission. He noted that the Certificate of Appropriateness, unless it is appealed, stops with this Board. 8. Comments by members Chair Ready announced that the Historical Society was taking the summer off. He stated that their Award of Excellence was given to Georgen Charnes, Library Archivist and information about it was contained on the website. 9. Public comments relative to historic preservation None. 10. Announce date of next meeting — June 13, 2022 Dr. Lowe announced that he cannot make the June meeting. Mr. Rumpf stated that he will send an email to the members to see if there are any conflict, and if so, they can reschedule the meeting. It was noted Ms. Sexton was moved to a regular position. 11. Adjournment There being no further business before the Board, Chair Ready adjourned the meeting at 7:54 p.m. &±h� &VUf Catherine Cherry Minutes Specialist 7