The Historic and Architectural Preservation Board granted a variance to allow a standing‑seam metal roof at 901 Tamiami Trail South (Venice Medical Center Condo Association) after the applicant completed the reroofing following urgent storm-related damage.

Planner Britney Smith said the application (referred to in staff remarks as PLAR23-00283 and later during motion as PLAR24-00283) requests approval of a standing‑seam roofing material that is prohibited in the Venetian theme district. Smith told the board the reroofing had already been completed after the owner and contractor moved to secure the property around Hurricane Milton; she said permitting confusion contributed to the after‑the‑fact submission and that staff would explain the permitting record to the board.

Chris Dow of Crowther Roofing explained the circumstances: the tile roof was damaged and the contractor and general contractor believed emergency work was necessary; the finished roof is a medium‑bronze standing‑seam aluminum system with a Kynar coating. Dow said the completed system is not high gloss and argued it is cosmetically an improvement to the entry portico. "We then found out about the historical society," Dow said, describing his company's experience working in historic areas and noting the contractor had previously worked on other local historic projects.

Board members and staff noted the chosen aluminum system offers high uplift resistance and long life; staff also said aluminum is appropriate within 1,500 feet of brackish water to maintain manufacturer warranties. The board and applicant discussed color and sheen; the applicant said a medium‑bronze finish was installed and that a sample had been left at the site but was unintentionally not brought to the hearing.

Members received a complaint letter from a nearby property owner about exterior lighting; staff said they had referred the lighting complaint to code enforcement for follow-up earlier that morning. The board discussed the after‑the‑fact nature of the application and weighed the building's pre‑VHP construction, the limited visibility of the roof from the street, the performance benefits of the metal system and the applicant's emergency circumstances.

The board moved to approve the variance; members then approved the application on a roll-call vote with all present voting yes. The chair instructed staff to record the decision and noted the board will continue to refine guidance and could consider code adjustments if standing‑seam metal roofs become a recurring issue for non‑VHP buildings.