Loading...
HPB-02-01-12 0o`er{ ge AGENDA 0`4.4r �sP HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting Date: February 1, 2012 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Smith at 243-7144 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing, such persons will need a record of these proceedings, and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA IV. MINUTES ❖ October 6, 2010 IV. ACTION ITEMS A. Class III Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness (2011-061) 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated Applicant: Yellow Building, LLC Reconsideration of a Class Ill Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness to legally establish the conversion of a garage into office space (completed) on the property, and a waiver request to the parking requirement associated with the change of use at the property. (Original request was denied by the HPB at its meeting of August 17. 2011.) VII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Board Members • Staff VIII. ADJOURN c wE. Wuawz Amy E. Alvarez Historic Preservation Planner Posted on: January 25, 2012 DELRAY BEACH All-America City 1 I 0 1993 2001 SIGN IN SHEET 2001 Regular Historic Preservation Board Meeting February 1 , 2012 PRINT FULL NAME ADDRESS OR ITEM NO. ORGANIZATION c c 10 _ 4\ , _ /9/‘e ri N5 f 76 7/3 ri-t-t ti CITY OF DELRAY BEACH HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD ORDER In Re: 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House Yellow Building, LLC, Property Owner/Applicant Weiner& Lynne, PA, Authorized Agent ORDER Following consideration of all the evidence and testimony presented at the February 1, 2012, meeting before the Historic Preservation Board for the City of Delray Beach and Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H), prior to approval, a finding must be made that any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The action before the Board is a Certificate of Appropriateness (File No. 2011-061) for a conversion of a garage into office space (completed) on the property, and a waiver request to the parking requirement, associated with the change of use at the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, pursuant to LRD Section 4.51(E)(3)(b)2. The Historic Preservation Board finds that there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings that the application for Consideration of a Class III Site Plan Modification and a Waiver Request to the parking requirement (File No. 2011-061) associated with the change of use at the property referenced above is hereby granted"( denied by a vote of (k eo • Pursuant to LDR Sections 2.4.7(E)(1) and 2.4.7(E)(3)(a), a decision of the Historic Preservation Board may be appealed to the City Commission so long as a letter of appeal is received by the City Clerk within ten(10) working days of the action being appealed. Based on the entire record before it, the Historic Preservation Board adopts this Order this 1st day of February 2012. Historic Prese r . • : . copies to: Yellow Building, LLC Weiner& Lynne, PA /G1.e1/1 l'S /'" OP‘ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD February 1, 2012 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:05 P. M. MEETING ADJOURNED 7:00 P. M. NAME ATTEND IV. Minutes October 6, IV. A. 85 SE 6th Avenue 2010 Blank House Certificate of Appropriateness Waiver 6 to 0 to APPROVE VOTE UNAMIOUSLY DENIED 6 TO 0 (SEE BELOW) DENIED 6 TO 0 TOM STANLEY P NO Y ANA MARIA APONTE P Made Motion NO Y RONALD BRITO P NO Y IRIS MCDONALD P NO Y SAMUEL SPEAR P Seconded NO Made Motion Y ANNETTE SMITH P NO Seconded Y ANNIE ADKINS ROOF ABSENT IV. A. Certificate of Appropriateness Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness and Class III Site Plan Modification for the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations. Waiver Move denial of the waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.9, to be relieved from four(4) of the required parking spaces associated with the illegally established office use, whereas six (6) parking spaces are required, based on a failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). ygi2' HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD February 1, 2012 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:00 P. M. MEETING ADJOURNED P. M. NAME ATTEND IV. Minutes IV. A. 85 SE 6t Avenue — Blank House October 6, 2010 o 1 �P7 Certificate of Appropriateness Waiver VOTE (Iv (9 67 TOM STANLEY1 r ' ANA MARIA APONTE 11 G 1'Y) .7)1 I RONALD BRITO cyl 0 IRIS MCDONALD 11 c SAMUEL SPEAR l� o �C / 'n ANNETTE SMITH 1 Q /Ilk ANNIE ADKINS ROOF ABSENT HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner/Applicant: Yellow Building, LLC Property Address: 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated HPB Meeting Date: February 1, 2012 File No: 2011-061 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the reconsideration of a Class III Site Plan Modification to legally establish the conversion of a garage into office space (completed) on the property, and a waiver request to the parking requirement associated with the change of use at the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2. BACKGROUND & DESCRIPTION The subject property is located at the northeast corner of SE 6th Avenue and SE 1st Street, and is individually designated on the Local Register of Historic Places as "The Blank House". The site consists of the historic 1903 two-story structure (remodeled in 1918), 1950 garage (illegally converted to office use in 1995), a 1954 carport, and a 1947 two-story apartment building with two, one bedroom apartment units and one, two bedroom apartment unit. At its meeting of August 16, 1995, the HPB approved a COA for the conversion of the Blank House from single-family residence to retail use, a second story above the garage to contain residential units, conversion of the garage into office space, and the construction of a nine-space, pea-rock parking area off of SE 1st Street. The Staff Report noted that at that time, the applicable parking requirements applied to new floor area only. Therefore, the conversion from single-family to retail did not require parking. Due to the elimination of existing parking spaces, the conversion of the garage to office use, however, required the provision of six (6) spaces (two eliminated from the garage, and four required for the new use). While the single family residence was subsequently converted to retail use and the garage converted to office use, building permits were not obtained for the conversion of the garage nor was the parking area required for these conversions ever installed. As a result, the office use is considered an illegal use. In October of 1995, the historic structure was converted to restaurant use with the second floor serving as storage area. At the time of the conversion to restaurant from the approved retail use, no additional parking was needed as the requirement for both uses was the same. Between 1995 and 2004, four (4) Site Plan Applications were submitted to address the outstanding issues associated with the office use; however, the required improvements to provide the required parking spaces were never installed, nor were any payments made for approved in-lieu of parking, and the approvals expired. Therefore, the conversion has remained illegal. As previously stated, the more recent request to resolve the matter occurred in 2004 which was for the approval of an in-lieu of parking for six (6) spaces. The PMAB reviewed the request at their meeting of January 20, 2004 and recommended that a compromise be made to provide one (1) row of parking on the east side of the approved parking lot, and convert the remaining west portion of 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 2 of 9 the lot adjacent to SE 6th Avenue to a tea garden. (Note: the tea garden was never installed, and this area has since been converted to a sidewalk café. The sidewalk café request has also not been approved.) The City Commission reviewed the request four times, ultimately asking that the applicant look at "alternative scenarios" to providing the required parking. A revised request was approved on August 3, 2004 which permitted the applicant to pay for two (2) parking spaces and install the balance of required spaces on site. No further action to this approval was followed up by the applicant. In January 2011, the property owner submitted a waiver to all required parking associated with a Class III Site Plan Modification for the legal establishment of the office space within the 1,027 square foot accessory building (originally utilized as a two-car garage). The request was reviewed by the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and the Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB), none of which supported the proposal as presented. The request was then considered by the HPB at its August 17, 2011 meeting. Motions to approve each request failed on a 0-5 vote, resulting in a denial. An appeal of the action was subsequently submitted for consideration by the City Commission at its October 4, 2011 meeting. The City Commission continued the item and requested additional background information from Staff relative to the history of non-compliance with the subject change of use. The summarized explanation prepared for the City Commission, which includes the history for site plan, building permits, and code enforcement review, is provided as Appendix A. The appeal was postponed by the applicant prior to further consideration by the City Commission, and this current reconsideration of the HPB denial was submitted on December 20, 2011. The current request before the Board is a revised Class III Site Plan Modification which includes a waiver of four (4) of the six (6) parking spaces. The balance of the required spaces (two) are being accommodated via the in-lieu of parking program. If approved, the applicant will be required to pay $15,600 for each space. The in-lieu of parking and waiver requests are anticipated to be reviewed by the City Commission at its meeting of February 21, 2012. It should be noted that a site inspection conducted by Staff on October 13, 2011 revealed yet another new, unapproved and non-permitted addition to the rear of the principal building on the site, which is an expansion of the existing restaurant use. Additional parking is required for this use area at a rate of 6 spaces per 1,000 square feet, as it is attributed to the restaurant. Further, the improved outside dining area to the south of the restaurant does not qualify as "Sidewalk Café" and therefore, would also require additional parking at a rate of 6 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The reconsideration of the denial of a Class III Site Plan Modification and associated recommendation to the City Commission on a waiver of four (4) parking spaces are now before the Board for consideration. SITE PLAN REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), Modifications to Site Plans and Development Plans, the approving body must make a finding that the proposed changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made concurrent with approval of a Class Ill modification. 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB (Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 3 of 9 Section 4.4.13, CBD Zoning Regulations (B)(2), Principal Uses and Structures Permitted Business, Professional and Medical Uses including but not limited to Interior decorating, medical and dental clinics, medical and dental laboratories, photographic studios, printing and publishing, business, medical and professional offices. (G)(1)(a), Supplemental District Regulations, Central Core and Beach Area The parking requirement for all non-residential uses, except restaurants, hotels and motels, shall be one space for each 300 square feet of floor area or fraction thereof. The parking required for the creation of new floor area, shall also include the replacement of any previously required parking which may be eliminated. (NOTE: Requirement in place at time of violation.) Section 4.6.9, Off Street Parking Regulations (C)(1)(a), Number of Parking Spaces Required, General Provisions, Fractions If the total number of parking spaces required results in a fraction, it shall be rounded up to the next highest figure. (NOTE: Requirement in place at time of violation.) STAFF COMMENT: The conversion of the garage to office use is permitted in the CBD. The amount of parking spaces required for the 1,027 square foot structure is four (1,027 square feet/300 = 3.42). The replacement of the two (2) spaces which previously existed in the garage increases the requirement to six (6). The spaces have not been physically provided and an in-lieu of parking for two (2) spaces is requested, with a waiver for the remaining four (4) spaces. The proposed waiver is analyzed further in this report. (C)(1)(b), Number of Parking Spaces Required, General Provisions, Handicap Spaces Special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Such spaces shall not be in addition to, but shall substitute for, required parking. STAFF COMMENT: It is noted that no Handicap parking spaces currently exist on site nor have any new ones been proposed. While not required, a handicap accessible space should be appropriately and adequately accommodated. In reviewing the plans for ADA accessibility, the approved and certified plans from 2003 include an "existing office building plan" and illustrate a restroom facility within the building which is not ADA compliant. An ADA compliant drinking fountain is also required. While the aforenoted handicap accessible parking space is not required at this time, should the Board determine that the required parking spaces, or a portion thereof, be constructed on-site, a handicap space which complies with all accessibility qualifications on the site will be required. (C)(3)(c), Number of Parking Spaces Required, General Provisions, Bicycle Parking Any non-residential use within the City's TCEA which, through the development review process, is determined to generate a demand. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in a designated area and by a fixed or stationary bike rack for the following uses: STAFF COMMENT: It does not appear that the provision of a bicycle rack has been included on the multi-use property. Therefore, it is recommended that a decorative bicycle rack, appropriate to the historic property, be provided on the site. This is particularly important due to the lack of vehicular spaces on the property available for use by either patrons of the restaurant or the office. Ks 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 4 of 9 (E)(3), In-Lieu Fee Subject to the limitations of this Section, new development, use conversion to existing buildings, building additions and/or renovations, that result in the requirement to provide new parking or additional parking, have the option of requesting some of the parking spaces to be approved by the City Commission through the payment in-lieu of parking program. Required parking for exclusively residential development or residential components of mixed use developments are not eligible for this in-lieu option. A maximum limit of 30% of eligible required parking can be provided under this option, except for use conversions for which there is no maximum. Before granting such approvals, the City Commission must find that adequate public parking options are available and that the request is consistent with the Land Development Regulations, City Comprehensive Plan, and all currently adopted City policies and/or studies. STAFF COMMENT: As indicated above, the in-lieu of parking regulations require that "the City Commission must find that adequate public parking options are available and that the request is consistent with the Land Development Regulations, City Comprehensive Plan, and all currently adopted City policies and/or studies." Consideration of this request will take place at the City Commission meeting of February 21, 2012. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(c), a Class III site plan modification is a modification to a site plan which represents either a change in intensity of use, or which affects the spatial relationship among improvements on the land, requires partial review of Performance Standards found in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.2.3, and the required findings of Section 2.4.5(G)(5). Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5)(Findings), with a Class Ill site plan modification formal findings under Section 3.1.1 are not required. However, a finding that the proposed changes do not significantly affect the originally approved plan must be made concurrent with approval of a Class Ill modification. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed modification does not significantly impact the findings as they relate to consistency with the Land Use Map, Concurrency or the Comprehensive Plan. Compliance with the Land Development Regulations parking requirements is the primary goal with the proposal. The development proposal has a minor impact on Concurrency items as discussed below. Traffic: The subject property is located in the City's Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC and OSSHAD zoning districts. The TCEA exempts the above-described areas from complying with the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. Properties within the TCEA are required to provide a traffic statement, as opposed to a traffic study. Therefore, the statement for the office use, which has not been submitted, should be provided particularly given the relief sought regarding the parking. Solid Waste Requirements: The office space is estimated to generate approximately 2.8 tons of solid waste per year (5.4 X 1,027 S.F./2000). The Solid Waste Authority indicates that the established level of service standards for solid waste will be met for all developments until 2021. 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 5 of 9 WAIVER ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(3)(b)2., waivers may be granted by the Historic Preservation Board for relief from the number of parking spaces required in Section 4.6.9 upon presentation of confirmation that adequate parking for a proposed use may be achieved by alternate means which are found to be in keeping with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. WAIVER ANALYSIS & STAFF COMMENT: As provided for in the referenced Section above, the applicant has requested a waiver to the provision of four (4) of the required parking spaces. The justification statement for the waiver request, which was submitted for the 2011 request, has not been revised and notes the following:: "Adequate parking...can be...achieved by alternate means which are consistent with the provisions and intent of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines....Thus, the owner is seeking to maintain the historic integrity of the site by allowing the property to exist with 3 spaces on the Property. ...the disruption of existing open spaces to provide otherwise underutilized parking would undermine the intent of Ordinance 38-07 and Future Land Use Policy A-4.2, which mandates that redevelopment shall provide for the preservation of existing resources." As required above, confirmation that adequate parking can be achieved has not been presented. Past site plan submittals have been approved which adequately provided the required amount of parking and were found to be appropriate and compatible to the historic property. Further, in 2004, additional options were approved to provide for a portion of the parking on-site and a portion via in- lieu. None of these options were followed up on or completed. While the original request was to waive all of the required spaces (6), concerns remain with the revised proposal and the continued potential to adversely affect the neighboring area in that the required parking for this private project will utilize public parking spaces, thereby reducing the number of public spaces available for other users. In addition to the above, it should be considered that while relief may be granted to the amount of required parking spaces, the intent of this "benefit" afforded to historic properties is not to excuse the provision of all parking but to provide alternatives. Otherwise, one could conclude that all parking on historic properties converted to office use is not necessary. It is noted that the parking requirement currently being applied is significantly less than the current code requirement. To understand the intensity of the uses on the site, and what their parking requirement would be if the site were required to comply with today's parking requirement, the following is noted. The required parking for each individual use would be: office-4, restaurant-13, multi-family residence-7, for a total of 24 spaces. The mixed-use parking calculation would require that twenty (20) spaces be provided, plus the two (2) spaces eliminated from the garage conversion to office. Utilizing the old code requirement indicates that only nine (9) parking spaces be provided (3 existing and 6 for the garage conversion). The current request is to legally establish the aforenoted change of use, and to waive four (4) of the required six (6) parking spaces. The subject request is not supported by Staff nor has it • 85 SE 6t"Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 6 of 9 received support from other reviewing Boards. If it is found that the most appropriate manner in which to maintain the historic integrity of the site is to not physically provide any of the required parking spaces, then Staff recommends that the property owner be required to make payment of all required spaces (6) via the in-lieu of parking process. This alternative would be the fair approach given that other historic properties converted to commercial use have been obligated to account for their required parking through the available and appropriate options, including the in- lieu program. Further, prior reviews for the same change of use were approved while appropriately accommodating the required parking (either all or a portion thereof) on the site. Based on the above, positive findings cannot be made to the Class III Site Plan Modification or the waiver request. Direction has been provided in the Staff Recommendation which requests that the parking be accommodated either on-site, or by alternate means, or a combination thereof, a bicycle rack be provided, and a traffic statement be provided. The subject application was also reviewed by the appropriate advisory boards as noted below. Staff would like to further emphasize the inappropriateness of the requested waiver illustrated by the lack of support by the Community Redevelopment Agency, and Downtown Development Authority. REVIEW BY OTHERS The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) reviewed the subject request at their January 12, 2012 meeting. The Board did not support the request. The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) reviewed the subject request at their March 14, 2011 meeting. The Board did not support the request. The Parking Management Advisory Board (PMAB) will consider the subject request at its January 31, 2012 meeting. The Board's recommendation will be noted at the meeting. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS (Ni A. Continue with direction. .v A\_) ( B. Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness and Class III Site Plan Modification for the ��' property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, by C'% adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is J consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations. C. Move denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness and Class III Site Plan Modification for the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, based upon a finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations. 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 7 of 9 RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Certificate of Appropriateness and Class III Site Plan Modification Continue the Certificate of Appropriateness and Class Ill Site Plan Modification for the property located at 85 SE 6th Avenue, The Blank House, Individually Designated, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, with the following direction: 1. That the application and request be revised to accommodate the parking on site, off-site, in- lieu of parking fees, or a combination of these options; 2. That a traffic statement be provided; 3. That a current floor plan be submitted; 4. That compliance with handicap accessibility be indicated; 5. That a decorative bicycle rack be provided on-site; and, 6. That the unapproved building addition and outdoor dining area be addressed either through the submittal of a separate Class Ill Site Plan Modification, or by revising the subject request prior to further review by the HPB and consideration of the waiver and in-lieu of parking spaces by the City Commission. Waiver Move defriat-of the waiver request to LDR Section 4.6.9, to be relieved from four (4) of the required parking spaces associated with the illegally established office use, whereas six (6) parking spaces are required, based on a failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 8 of 9 APPENDIX A The following "Background" was prepared in anticipation of review by the City Commission at its meeting of October 18, 2011: At its meeting of October 4, 2011, the City Commission considered the subject appeal and tabled the item so that additional background information and clarification could be provided by Staff regarding the outstanding violations of the illegal conversion of the garage to office use, and the Code Enforcement Board case which was resolved in 2003. The summary of the longstanding history of outstanding permits, the code case, and multiple site plan applications submitted for HPB review is below. In researching our files, a Class V site plan was submitted in 1995 for the conversion of the principal structure (Blank House) to retail use; conversion of the garage to office use, construction of a 9 space pea rock parking area at the SW corner of the site; and additional site improvements. The request was approved by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) on August 16, 1995 (valid through February 1997), and it was noted that this approval was for a conversion that already occurred without permits, and without the provision of required parking. No site improvements were installed and the site plan approval expired in February 1997. On March 17, 2000, a building permit application was submitted to convert the garage space to office and to construct associated site improvements (parking lot, etc.). As the original site plan approval had expired (February, 1997), a new site plan approval was required. On December 12, 2000 a Class Ill site plan modification was submitted for conversion of garage to two offices (already established), installation of outdoor dining and exterior staircase for the Blank House, and construction of 8 asphalt parking spaces at SW corner of lot, and 1 handicap space at the North side of the lot. A building permit was submitted on December 19, 2001 (01-77442) for the conversion from garage to office and related site improvements. This permit request did not include the garage door replacement with French doors done in 1995. On January 18, 2001, a code violation was issued (CEB-01-77906) for conducting work without a permit (changing of the garage doors to French doors). As the applicant was seeking site plan approval (per December 12, 2000 submittal) for the use conversion, the citation was likely limited to the physical work which had been accomplished without a permit. This site plan modification request submitted on December 12, 2000 was approved at the HPB meeting of May 2, 2001. The May, 2001 Class Ill site plan was not certified(conditions of approval had not been addressed) and the permit was not issued. The improvements were not constructed and the Class Ill approval (May, 2001) expired on November 2, 2002. As no action was taken by the applicant to get a permit for the conversion of the doors, a lien was levied on April 18, 2002. A new Class Ill site plan modification and COA (2003-052 SPM) were submitted on November 22, 2002, which included the conversion of the garage into offices and associated site improvements (including parking). This was approved subject to conditions on March 19, 2003. The Class Ill site plan modification was certified on June 3, 2003, and building permits were issued on August 6, 2003 (01-77442). As the French doors were now included in the improvements on the permit, the citation issued by the Code Enforcement Division (work constructed without a permit) was satisfied and a letter was sent to the applicant on August 15, 2003. The lien amount was considered by Code Enforcement on October 14, 2003 and reduced. This reduced lien was paid on November 13, 2003 and the lien was closed. 85 SE 6th Avenue, Blank House; 2011-061 HPB Meeting February 1, 2012; Page 9 of 9 On December 5, 2003, a COA and Class ll Site Plan Modification (COA 2004-076-SPI-CL2) was submitted. The request included an English Rose Garden and fountain in place of the parking lot and a request to replace the 9 spaces with 6 in-lieu parking spaces. A reduction to 6 spaces from 9 was requested as the apartment conversion originally part of the 1995 approval was never implemented. A revision to building permit number 01-77442 was filed on December 29, 2003 to "change parking lot to English Rose Garden and walk path". The permit was put on hold pending Class ll site plan approval (submitted on December 5, 2003) which was scheduled for HPB consideration on January 7, 2004. The item was tabled by HPB at this meeting due to concerns over the elimination of the parking spaces. The HPB approved the Class ll modification at its meeting of March 4, 2004 and recommended approval of the purchase of 6 in-lieu of parking spaces. The request for 6 in-lieu of parking spaces was reviewed by the City Commission at 4 separate meetings with a final approval granted for the purchase of 2 in-lieu parking with 4 additional new spaces for a total of 7 spaces to be provided on site. The Class ll site plan modification expired in August of 2005, as revised plans were never submitted for certification, and the in-lieu fees were never paid. As a result, the revision to permit 01-77442, submitted on December 29, 2003, was never issued, and the permit file was closed out on July 24, 2008 due to no activity. At its August 21, 2011 meeting, the HPB reviewed yet another attempt after 16 years to address the office conversion. This request was to waive all required parking (6 spaces) for the office space conversion. This request was not supported and the appeal of that denial is now before the City Commission.