Where Are We Going With This?

I suspect many Biscayne Parkers would either refer to the Park as "quaint," or they'd agree it's a good description of what and who we are.  It's what many of us want us to be, and to continue to be.  Some of us cling tightly to this thematic description.

There's a contingent who don't like two-story houses here.  (They're within the Code, but some people persist in not liking them.)  I hear complaints about the contemporary-style houses, even the older ones.  Some don't like the creeping SoBe effect, with two-story additions on the backs of one-story houses.

A few years or so back, there was a battle, of sorts, regarding metal roofs.  Not charming.  Too industrial.  Ruination to the Village.  Imagine, some fretted, if X percent of BP houses eventually converted to metal roofs.  No, no, no!  And then, we changed the Code to allow them, and now, we have a few more than we did.

And it's not just the style of newer homes, but also the mass of them.  P&Z won't approve a design that doesn't respect setbacks, but even at that, some of the newer projects seem imposing.  There were complaints about what Max Deitermann did with the old "Larry King" property.  And there's the modern, two-story, energy-efficient house in the block just west of mine.  Some BPers don't like these projects, because the new construction seems too dominant for the lot and for the surrounding houses.

It's worth the reminder here that among the factors P&Z can take into account is "harmony" with the Village, and even with the section or block in question.  So, when P&Z have accepted an architectural proposal, we are to assume they have looked at the Code requirements overall, the setbacks, and even the "sense" of the project being proposed.  They have agreed that it will look in some sense nice, or at least that it won't look bad, or disproportionate, or provocative.  That even includes things like colors.

Well, there's a very interesting project most of the way to completion.  It's in 117th Street, between 6th and 7th Avenues, on the south side of the street.  Mac Kennedy and I were trying to figure out how many lots this project occupies.  We weren't sure if the street frontage was one lot, or two.  The depth seems clearly to be two.  So the building occupies either two or four lots.  It's two-story, and it's a very modern style.  Just west of the front of the house is the "hacienda," a double front Spanish-style house.  To the east of the house in question is another Spanish-style one-story house.  It's a little unbelievable to walk around this part of the block, to see how vast is this new house.  As a frame of reference, and at risk of being provocative, no one on this block has any privacy any more.  The backs of all the other houses, and all of the back yards, are now fully visible from this structure.  Not to be crass about it, but if any of those neighbors are typically relaxed about their attire in the "privacy" of their homes, or if they like skinny-dipping, that party is about to be over, unless they're also exhibitionistic.

In "full disclosure," the builder of the house, who, as far as I know, intends to occupy it when it's done, is also a member of P&Z.  I would of course like to assume he recused himself from consideration of the plan that was proposed, and that his P&Z colleagues didn't grant him anything they wouldn't have granted anyone else, but I'm just stating the fact.

One of my friends, who more or less always stays "above the fray," recently sent me a text message, to ask if I had seen this house.  If I hadn't, he suggested I "take a look."  I said I had in fact seen it, that in my opinion, it was "massive," and also in my opinion, it seemed "too big for the lot."  He replied with "looks out of place to me."  "Me, too," I agreed.

These are the particulars: the evolution of permitted paint colors; roofing materials; increasing size of houses, changes of styles of houses.  But the bigger picture is whether the Village has, or should have, an architectural theme.  (In further disclosure, I will say that I don't think it has or should have.  I think we're very eclectic, and I'm good with us that way.  My larger concerns are landscaping and general maintenance.)  Some people who think it should think that theme should be old-timey, low key, low rise.  Hey, that's a philosophy.  But it might be a slippery slope that leads to some other BP home/property-owners who are also OK with low rent, little demanded of property-owners, and conditions and presentations that are frankly unkempt.  I suppose this isn't the time for me to remind us that we just elected an entire Commission of BP residents who have no personal ambition regarding property appearance, and who are extremely unlikely to make demands on the rest of us.  It's true, though.

But what do we think of our growing evolution to more modern styles, and increasing mass?  Interestingly, the builder of the new project in 117th St has preserved a little stand of small trees and shrubs in front of the house.  If this is indicative 1) that he intends to landscape, and 2) that his landscape theme will be more redolent, that's nice.  It won't distract much from the mass and dominance of the building, but it's the most we can get from him now.