Once again, Coral Gables can’t decide if a ranch house is an architectural landmark
Once again, a Coral Gables body has deadlocked on what’s become one of the hottest issues in the City Beautiful: whether to designate an early ranch-style house by a noted architect as a protected historic site.
On Tuesday, it was the city commission’s turn to fail to come to a binding decision following a virtual, three-hour public hearing that saw more than a dozen people testify remotely for and against, plus the live one-by-one review by the city clerk of about 100 emails.
Commissioners cast a 2-2 vote on a motion by Commissioner Jorge Fors that would have upheld a decision by the city preservation board against preserving the 1937 home by architect Russell Pancoast. That means a final decision remains up in the air, pending likely reconsideration by the end of May.
The Coral Gables preservation office proposed the designation after concluding the house is historically and architecturally significant because it reset the city’s predominant look from the Mediterranean-inspired design of its early years to modern styles for decades to come.
A Coral Gables resident who lives next door to the Pancoast home on Asturia Avenue, Vicki Cerda, filed an appeal challenging the preservation board’s 5-4 denial of designation in March. That came after Gables city manager Peter Iglesias declined to pursue an appeal on behalf of the preservation office he oversees.
Mayor Raúl Valdés-Fauli recused himself on Tuesday at Cerda’s request. The mayor had publicly aired his opposition to the designation prior to the preservation board vote in an unusual letter that castigated city staff for proposing it. Because preservation decisions are quasi-judicial zoning matters, board members and city commissioners are not supposed to discuss or reach a decision outside public hearings in which evidence and legal arguments are presented.
Tuesday’s 2-2 vote means the question will automatically come back to the commission at the next meeting on May 26. But barring a change of heart from Fors or Vice Mayor Vince Lago, who also voted to uphold the preservation board decision, it seems unlikely the next vote tally will be any different. Under city rules, a second tie vote would mean Cerda’s appeal is defeated.
The proposed house designation has become a flash point for clashing views over preservation in a city renowned for its strict codes and protection of historic buildings and sites, but that has seen increasing debate over the impact of a wave of dense redevelopment in and around its downtown and several decisions not to protect key buildings standing in the way. Valdés-Fauli, who often has supported preservation, is among a faction arguing that overzealous designation efforts are hurting real estate interests, while preservationists say they fear the city is turning away from its historic legacy.
Cerda, who told commissioners she had over 100 signatures supporting her appeal from Gables residents, argued that the preservation board majority erred in dismissing substantial evidence marshaled by the city preservation office in support of the Pancoast house designation.
The city office was legally obligated to review the property for historic value after its purchasers, members of the prominent Valls family that owns the Versailles and La Carreta restaurant empire, filed for a demolition permit. The city’s zoning ordinance says a property “shall” be designated historic if it meets one of five criteria for cultural, historic or architectural importance. An extensively researched report by the city preservation office concluded the Pancoast house meets three of the criteria.
The preservation board has come under fire from preservationists because it carried out little to no substantive debate on the merits of the proposed designation in reaching its decision. That means the question of why the board majority voted against designation, Cerda told commissioners, “is kind of a mystery.”
“It’s very simple. Rules are to be followed,” Cerda added. “The decision of the board was wrong. This house qualifies. It set a precedent. It set a style.”
Mario Garcia-Serra, an attorney for homeowner Lourdes Valls, disputed that conclusion. He said the preservation board vote means the majority did not agree the home met the criteria, even if they did not explain themselves. Garcia-Serra argued that the house is an isolated, one-off job that inspired no imitators and did not represent the best of Pancoast’s work.
“The facts do not support that this was a trend-setting house,” he said.
In voting to overturn the preservation board’s decision, commissioners Patricia Keon and Michael Mena both expressed concern over the lack of comments or discussion from the preservation board majority.
“My concern is, there was nothing to refute the substantive, competent evidence presented” in the city report, Mena said.
But Mena and Keon opted not to propose remanding the decision back to the preservation board for reconsideration or further discussion, citing concerns over fruitlessly prolonging the issue. The proposed designation has dragged on for months, in part because of repeated requests for deferrals by the house owners.
Lago and Fors said they saw little reason to second-guess the preservation board.
After the vote, Karelia Carbonell, president of the Historic Preservation Association of Coral Gables, expressed “such disappointment” over Lago’s vote and said she hopes he will reconsider. Lago, who is running for mayor, has supported other historic designations championed by the organization, even in some losing cases.
This story was originally published May 12, 2020 at 5:13 PM.