Minutes from the  April 25, 2022 meeting

Tabled from April 25, 2022, meeting
Certificate of Appropriateness 22-22 - Tesla Solar Roof and Tesla Powerwall(s) - 718 Boston Avenue

The clerk introduced Certificate of Appropriateness #22-22 for a Tesla Solar Roof and Tesla Powerwall(s) at 718 Boston Avenue.

Chairman Hayek asked the City Attorney to explain the Quasi-Judicial Hearing procedures.

Before commencing this Quasi-Judicial Hearing, the City Attorney, reminded the Board that they serve in both a legislative and quasi-judicial role. When acting as a legislative body, the Board engages in law-making activity by passing laws and establishing policies. When acting as a quasi-judicial body, the Board applies those laws and policies and is held to stricter procedural requirements. Quasi-judicial proceedings are less formal than proceedings before a circuit court but are more formal than the normal Board meeting. Quasi-judicial proceedings must follow basic standards of notice and due process; and decisions must be made based on competent substantial evidence. Therefore, Board members have a duty to conduct the quasi-judicial proceedings more like judges than legislators. That is why the Commission has established the uniform procedures for quasi-judicial hearings that will be followed today.

Chairman Hayek called the proceeding to order. 

The clerk confirmed the City complied with advertisement and notice requirements. 

Chairman Hayek inquired with the Board regarding ex-parte communications and asked the Clerk to call the roll:                   
                                         
Ms. Spivey - yes
Ms. Davis - no
Ms. Theuns - no
Ms. Anicito - no
Ms. Starke - no
Mr. Westbury - no
Chairman Hayek - no
 
Chairman Hayek opened the public hearing. 

The clerk was asked to swear in those wanting to speak during this Quasi-Judicial hearing. Individuals in the audience intending to speak on this item were asked to stand, raise their right hand, and administered an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 

Staff Presentation:
Maria Lewicka, Historic Preservation Planner, provided an overview of the application. The subject property is located within the Sample Oaks Historic District. The two story, wood frame house was built in circa 1910. Its Colonial Revival architectural style is expressed by a hip roof, gable dormer, symmetrical facade, an offset entrance, 1/1 double hung sash windows and drop siding exterior wall fabric. On April 25, 2022, the Historic Preservation Board tabled the Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of the Tesla Solar Roof and Powerwalls due to the applicant's absence. The Historic Preservation Board requested additional information including samples of the material, color options, visual overlay and hurricane standards.

The Tesla solar roof has all the great promise that you would expect from this innovative company. Instead of using typical solar panels, the concept turns the entire roof into a solar array to generate electric power. The Tesla solar roof uses tempered glass panels that replace standard shingles, providing the same protection of a traditional roof while also capturing solar energy. In terms of the actual ability to capture solar power, the Tesla solar roof is more effective and has a lower cost per watt than conventional solar panels, and Tesla's Powerwall is a better storage system for generated energy.

The technology is new, so the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability does not yet provide specific guidelines for solar roofs.

Whether this solar technology can be used successfully to benefit a historic building without adversely compromising its character or that of the site or surrounding historic district requires weighing advantages of the green energy provided with strict adherence to historic preservation guidelines.

The visible surface of the proposed solar roof is designed to mimic a traditional shingle roof in texture and colors but does not compose fluently with the existing historic residential structure. However, it is not intrusive, nor does it interfere with the streetscape.

Board questions for Staff: None

Applicant Presentation: Jose Alanis, sworn, explained that the original roof is on the house, and it was coated with silicone five years ago.  He stated the wind rating on the Tesla roof is 180 mph and the glass panels are non-breakable and guaranteed for 25 years with an option for another 20 years.  The powerwalls will generate electricity to provide power back up.  Mr. Alanis noted that the materials for the roof are delayed from Ukraine.

Board questions for Applicant: Mr. Westbury asked if a lighter color roof is available other than black.  Mr. Alanis said it is actually charcoal gray, and he is trying to get the lighter gray color. Ms. Anicito asked when the applicant will know what color option is available.  Mr. Alanis explained that it could be a year or so due to the delayed materials from Ukraine.

Public comment: None

Staff final comments: Ms. Lewicka stated the Secretary of Interior Standards does not currently address Tesla roof panels. Ms. Lewicka also noted the roof requirements from insurance companies. She said the state prefers shingles to metal roofs and the Tesla roof is similar to shingles but not the same and the Tesla roof provides power.

Chairman Hayek, seeing no one else, closed the public hearing. 

Comments by the Board: Chairman Hayek asked it the Certificate of Appropriateness approval expires. Ms. Davis asked what will happen if the lighter color roof is not available.  

Certificate of Appropriateness 22-30 - Duplex - 510 Dundas Court

The clerk introduced Certificate of Appropriateness #22-30 for a Duplex located at 510 Dundas Court.

Chairman Hayek asked the City Attorney to explain the Quasi-Judicial Hearing procedures.

Before commencing this Quasi-Judicial Hearing, the City Attorney, reminded the Board that they serve in both a legislative and quasi-judicial role. When acting as a legislative body, the Board engages in law-making activity by passing laws and establishing policies. When acting as a quasi-judicial body, the Board applies those laws and policies and is held to stricter procedural requirements. Quasi-judicial proceedings are less formal than proceedings before a circuit court but are more formal than the normal Board meeting. Quasi-judicial proceedings must follow basic standards of notice and due process; and decisions must be made based on competent substantial evidence. Therefore, Board members have a duty to conduct the quasi-judicial proceedings more like judges than legislators. That is why the Commission has established the uniform procedures for quasi-judicial hearings that will be followed today.

Chairman Hayek called the proceeding to order. 

The clerk confirmed the City complied with advertisement and notice requirements. 

Chairman Hayek inquired with the Board regarding ex-parte communications and asked the Clerk to call the roll:                   
                                         
Ms. Davis - no
Ms. Theuns - no
Ms. Anicito - no
Ms. Starke - no
Mr. Westbury - no
Ms. Spivey - no
Chairman Hayek - no
 
Chairman Hayek opened the public hearing. 

The clerk was asked to swear in those wanting to speak during this Quasi-Judicial hearing. Individuals in the audience intending to speak on this item were asked to stand, raise their right hand, and administered an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 

Staff Presentation:
Maria Lewicka, Historic Preservation Planner, provided an overview of the application. The subject site is located in the Lincoln Park Historic District. The residence located on this site was demolished in year 1997 and the site has remained vacant.The applicant is requesting approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a duplex of approximately 2,720 square feet area with associated driveways, parking and landscaping.

The subject duplex is proposed on a prominent site in the Lincoln Park Historic District. Design of the new building meets the technical aspects of the Secretary of the Interior regarding size, scale, materials and massing. However, the architectural elements do not provide a continuity of character of the surrounding historic neighborhood. While the overall proposal is consistent with Secretary of the Interior standards, staff recommends the Historic Preservation Board approve the request with recommendation that additional architectural details, like decorative window shutters and decorative railings, be incorporated into the final design to better comport with the character of the historic district, that as many trees as possible will be preserved, and parking dimensions conform to the requirements of Sec. 125-315 (c) Design Standards.

Board questions for Staff: Chairman Hayek asked how shutters will enhance the building.

Applicant Presentation: Terry Coley and Monikin Neal, sworn. Mr. Coley stated the duplexes will look like the other duplexes that were recently built on N. 9th Street. He said the trees will remain on the property and Ms. Neal stated there will be an overhang on the duplexes to accommodate the historical look.  

Board questions for Applicant: Ms. Theuns asked if the features will be the same as the picture shown.  Mr. Westbury asked if there will be a metal roof.  Ms. Theuns asked if the parking can go in the rear of the building.  Ms. Starke asked if the niceness of the landscape will be maintained if damaged by a hurricane.  

Public comment: None

Staff final comments: None

Chairman Hayek, seeing no one else, closed the public hearing. 

Comments by the Board: None

Certificate of Appropriateness 22-28 - New Front and Rear Porch - 717 S. Indian River Drive

The clerk introduced Certificate of Appropriateness #22-28 for a new front and rear porch located at 717 S. Indian River Drive.

Chairman Hayek asked the City Attorney to explain the Quasi-Judicial Hearing procedures.

Before commencing this Quasi-Judicial Hearing, the City Attorney, reminded the Board that they serve in both a legislative and quasi-judicial role. When acting as a legislative body, the Board engages in law-making activity by passing laws and establishing policies. When acting as a quasi-judicial body, the Board applies those laws and policies and is held to stricter procedural requirements. Quasi-judicial proceedings are less formal than proceedings before a circuit court but are more formal than the normal Board meeting. Quasi-judicial proceedings must follow basic standards of notice and due process; and decisions must be made based on competent substantial evidence. Therefore, Board members have a duty to conduct the quasi-judicial proceedings more like judges than legislators. That is why the Commission has established the uniform procedures for quasi-judicial hearings that will be followed today.

Chairman Hayek called the proceeding to order. 

The clerk confirmed the City complied with advertisement and notice requirements. 

Chairman Hayek inquired with the Board regarding ex-parte communications and asked the Clerk to call the roll:                   
                                         
Ms. Theuns - no
Ms. Anicito - no
Ms. Starke - no
Mr. Westbury - no
Ms. Spivey - no
Ms. Davis - no
Chairman Hayek - no
 
Chairman Hayek opened the public hearing. 

The clerk was asked to swear in those wanting to speak during this Quasi-Judicial hearing. Individuals in the audience intending to speak on this item were asked to stand, raise their right hand, and administered an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 

Staff Presentation:
Maria Lewicka, Historic Preservation Planner, provided an overview of the application. The subject two-(2) story Colonial Revival Style wood frame residence is a contributing structure in the River’s Edge Historic District. The St. Lucie County Property Appraiser’s Property Record Card indicates the year of construction as 1928 and the Florida Master Site File indicates 1905 as a construction date. Notable architectural features include a hip roof, a hip dormer, and enclosed entrance porch. Alterations consist of the material used to enclose the porch and asbestos shingle siding which has been installed over the original wooden exterior wall fabric. 

The applicant is requesting approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow for the removal of the existing entry and rear porches and the installation of a new front and rear porch.

The new design, proportions and architectural elements of the proposed porches compose well with the remaining part of the existing building. The new alterations enhance the property’s overall appearance and its contribution to the historic character of the River’s Edge district. The alterations are consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards 5 and 9 and staff has no objection to the approval of the proposal as submitted.

Board questions for Staff: Ms. Theuns asked if there is another closed in porch on the right side of the house, and she asked if the windows were replaced with the same fenestration of the original windows.  Chairman Hayek asked if the construction has already started. 

Applicant Presentation: Eden Hall and Edward Clair, sworn.  Mr. Hall explained a permit has been pulled for the interior remodel.  The front and back porch were not on the original permit. The house was in dangerous condition with leaks and mold and that is when they decided to add the porches.  They are unable to get the original Dade County pine, but they will be using cypress with an oil based primer to look as close as possible to the original pine.  Mr. Clair stated there were lots of issues in keeping the foundation level. He said the house was not structurally safe, and the back porch floor had disintegrated and was on the verge of collapsing.  He noted the front porch was not built to code and had to be torn down.  Mr. Clair stated the glass and sash was removed from the original windows and replaced with hurricane impact glass and original trim. Mr. Clair highlighted that the farmhouse style porch with an open metal roof fits with the historical style of the home.

Board questions for Applicant: Mr. Westbury asked if the front elevation was accessible.  Mr. Hayek asked how much siding was being replaced.  

Public comment: None

Staff final comments: None

Chairman Hayek, seeing no one else, closed the public hearing. 

Comments by the Board: Ms. Starke commended the applicant on the cypress milling.  Ms. Theuns noted that she restored a 1905 home.  Chairman Hayek stated he did not have luck with cypress when restoring the Cider Works building.

Administratively Approved Certificates of Appropriateness - April 2022

Administratively Approved Certificates of Appropriateness - May 2022