07/09/1996 (2)
. '.'" ,',.. __ 0-.. . ....-4_ .. ....-..' '. ' . .'. \' , . . . ~
,I, '~,;~",l ,
.~.' ,.'~.. , to ....
..
'. '.
I,' ,
",
:. ,):.
. :', I
: '
" \
y::
'./",' ."
,"
'. . .
'( L.,:.>:....l.i,
. ':"
.'..
")
. , .~'
, "
:, - '.,
;. . ~.
'. . ....' ,. ,~... ~.
~:...: ..........)1 ,~.~ ...~: ;J:'!,I:,"~I'r. ~;'-~':-1:J(~,:":: '.}::":= . l.~ . > . '~ ..~', (. ..; ~'Y4'. .....
.,.,. '
t.
-y
DRB
, ;
Design Review Board
Minutes
'I'.
,f
,Date
u
--
.,'
0',':
gL1,0
..
"
,)
, '.
.' }.
,"'<'.
..'
, ,
l ~' .
.: !.
.,'
"..
, "
'J,.
\'t
, .
'. ,,;_: . ',".' .,.', '.,".' .,','...:'... ". '.;..,..~:,'..'..;,.,';' ".,.' , ,'... """ ,",,:,: ~. "."":'1...1'.',"."...:,,,"',,,.,;'...,','
" . " ',' .' .: ' "'1-' '. \ r., "~I'.""': . ,.,;-...','"
, ',' ....' ~':;, ,",' ,,' I. ~". ...,' ~,..,." ":, ,',:. '.'" ,",',':'.'..:
. I .'.........4-.. . _...","':-_~.....~.J.;'_~,_.......... I ' " , ",,','.0'" :.\' .:. " ' ' " 0 t
.., .)
, "
. .:'. ~j I.
. .. ',~ '''e .
, ,.e
~
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF CLEARWATER
July 9, 1996
Present:
William McCann
Kathy Milam
Robert Herberich
MacArthur "'Mac" Boykins
Mark Cagni
Alex Plisko
Howard Hamilton
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Don McCarty
Gwen Legters
Chair
Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Assistant City Attorney
Design Planner
Board Reporter
To provIde continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 3:00 p.m. in City Hall.
Minutes Approval - June 28, 1996
~,
Member Milam moved to approve the minutes according to copies submitted in writing
to each member by the Board Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
New Proposals for Design Review
1. ORB 96-004 (LA Permitting Service for Dr. Susan Player, DC)
51 9 Cleveland Street
Mr. McCarty presented verbal background information, stating the applicant wishes to
install a 44-square foot sign above her second story windows facing Cleveland Street. While
the lettering appears tasteful. Mr. McCarty expressed concern the location across the upper
portion of the facade is higher than normal to comply with good design principles for
advertising. displays.
Frank Thompson, sign contractor representing' the applicant, stated the height is needed to
avoid having the sign obscured by a 20-foot tall tree in front of the building. The additional
height will facilitate electrical and mechanical installation from the roof top instead of through
the doctor's office walls. He circulated photographs of the tree in front of the building. The
sign is to be 24 inches tall with red letters outlined with light powder blue neon.
,0
No one was present to speak in support of the request. A letter of no objection from Terry
Tsafatinos, the property owner, was submitted with the application. No verbal or written
opposition was expressed.
mdrb07a.96
1
07/09/96
'"lJ:'~ ~ t . i .., . I ~'I, .~I~'?' t"",,,...':.l<"~4-~"''''''-''''.
.-. -.., .. ............<<....".......ut -I.. '. ~.~...,'I. ..,. ....... '
.\;'-'" ....... '.. ....... '. .....,:,...;,,"'..,;"\ ,".'>::'." ....,. .".:..:.,..:,...,...,.,.....'.. ',':"/":';'.',"','
/. ," ", ,.'., ..".. .,I,J,."" ,rl..,. J~,..I" ,.,t.J.,.' ',"'," : "',,..
. . l , .,". . ,...r. ' ,.~. ~ . I' : ~ . '..".. .. .1
"
'}
In response to questions, Mr. Thompson said he will follow sign code for sign size. The
installation will go through parapet wall to avoid causing roof leaks. The sign is internally
illuminated plastic. The applicant had not reviewed the design guidelines.
Concerns were expressed the application does not follow design guidelines for sign type,
size, height, placement, or pedestrian orientation. It was indicated illuminated plastic signs
with neon are not the direction the board wished to see for downtown. Mr. McCarty pointed
out the potential exists for sign requests from three separate tenants for this property. He
supported avoiding a piecemeal approach by meeting with the property owner to develop
consistent overall building signage. Discussion ensued regarding the board's alternatives,
existing tree landscaping in the area, different design alternatives. As design review is done at
not cost to the applicant, it was suggested the applicant work with the property owner to
rethink the application and design a sign more in line with the guidelines. Mr. Thompson was
advised how to obtain a copy of the design guidelines.
Member Pliska moved to deny ORB 96-004 as submitted because the application does not
follow design guidelines. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. ORB 96-005 Intervest Bank (Spencer & Jonnatti, Architects)
606 Chestnut Street
Mr. McCarty presented verbal background information, stating the applicant wishes to
renovate an existing bank building and construct a second story addition.
o Steve Spencer, architect representing the applicant, discussed elevation drawings and site
plans. Architectural corner elements and gables will be added to prov;~e a more traditional and
aesthetic look, more consistent with the area than what exists currently. The flat roof will be
replaced with a pitched roof covered with shinglas emulating a slate look, walls will have
cement plaster finish, and landscaped green areas will be added to the site. A neutral tri-color
scheme is proposed to coordinate with the roof material. The owners want to use the building
for their corporate offices.
Mr. Spencer responded to questions, stating he did not have access to the design
guidelines when he started the project over a year ago. Regarding the east elevation drawing,
he said an equipment area will be recessed into the roof and screened from street view with
matching roofing material. This was done to avoid rooftop equipment mounting. The existing
sign was recently redone in conformance with the sign code and will not be changed.
Discussion ensued regarding orientation of the building in relation to Court and Chestnut
Streets, relocation of driveways. and additional landscaping proposed to help traffic circulation
and improve aesthetics of the site.
The applicant was commanded for the high quality of the proposal and the presentation. It
was indicated the entire project is a good example of what is being encouraged for the
downtown community. Staff was encouraged to use this application as a model for future
presentations.
Member Cagni moved to approve ORB 96-005 as submitted, because the application is in
U keeping with the design guidelines. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
mdrb07a.96
2
07/09/96
. ',':' " .' .: .'" - I . L~ .~ .,.... ':..~.w~."...'~_.~-~.._...........~..:........ J' I " :". ' . I .: ~ I .,', , '-,
, .
,~
3. ORB 96-006 City of Clearwater (Rowe Architects)
Pierce Street Parking Garage, 640 Pierce Street
Mr. McCarty presented verbal background information, and introduced John Williams, with
Rowe Architects, the firm representing the City.
Mr. Williams stated this application is the third of three buildings comprising the Municipal
Services Complex. The garage is to be built on the northwest corner of Pierce and East
Streets, after the old police department building is demolished. The parking garage will reflect
the context, materials, scale and structure of the two existing buildings in the complex. The
garage will have the same sand blasted precast concrete wall panels, anodized aluminum
windows, light gray laminated glass, and white painted exposed steel stairs. The philosophy of
using the same design will facilitate public identification of the buildings as the City complex.
Landscaping is being designed and installed bV the City. A row of Washingtonian palms along
Pierce Street will visually tie the three sites together. Junipers along Park Street will reflect the
exterior columns. Palms are being used because of the limited green area around the site. The
buildings will be stepped down in scale as they approach the Pinellas Trail to the east.
No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed.
Board concerns were expressed with a solid, blank wall within ten feet of the western
property line, and a second driveway on Park Street taking up space that could be used for
landscaping. It was felt the building lacks pedestrian scale. Concerns were expressed
regarding configuration and use of police and employee-only parking within the garage, and
{.;;.z,\ inadequate public parking on each site. A question was raised regarding the purpose and
4~ unfavorable appearance of metal plates sticking out of the support columns. While
acknowledging plans were drawn before the design guidelines were in place, disappointment
was expressed the building does not address the style, aesthetics, or streetscape features that
have been promoted downtown for some time.
Responding to concerns, Mr. Williams described elements of the proposal that make the
buildings more pedestrian friendly, including code required retail space to be provided on the
ground floor along East Street. The blank wall on Park Street is related to a required one-hour
fire rating and involves police vehicle security and access. The metal plates are the visible ends
of the steel girder supports that extend through the columns.
Mr. McCarty explained he requested for the garage proposal be brought forward for the
board's review, but the design was given tentative approval before implementation of the
Design Review Board. While he agreed many details may have been done differently if the
board had been involved sooner, he pointed out the architects received permission to proceed
with the plan as detailed. Mr. Williams stated they were directed to provide program features
to harden the building for hurricane protection. It was not possible to make the project more
aesthetic and meet the program requirements on the minimal budget provided. In response to
a question" Mr. Williams said elevated walkways are not planned to link the garage to the
buildings, but could be added if future funds permit.
~
Member Herberich moved to accept ORB 96-006 as submitted. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
mdrb07a.96
3
07/09/96
",...,1/,;_,,"," ',' , ': .,':-:-.:; ,'" ,: ", ","~ "'.,:',"~,,::.<?,,'>' .,',: ,:',;'\;",,',"'.:..' ",.',: " :' ':':1" .',':', ' ',,' ::'. /:/',.':':" /: ','.'.' ,; :"i":::: :~;"':'<;':~","<,
',I, . ," \" "',"'. ~" 'g"'" H'" ',.,', , ',' ,"..".,. .
", ':~" ' ','.' ,'""',,, \',.':-:',.,.":,...:'., J"'::" ,,' : '" ,;',',', . ',.,,~. "',;"'.' ,','.: ,:'': " ,:' ,":.":.'.'-',",:",..:,
i . ~ . , "'1 ~ , I '. ,\ " .. I .. ~, . ~ .
':" ...' 1,1. ~ , '. ,~, ,': ~.: ,~\ " . ".' ,',' <, '. \ '~",-l"'.~J I I.' '
~ ,:' ,.,,', '~ ,'\',,' ~,'.~.. _:_~_'...-......t....--":,:"~,.' :,.,..... . I., \ " I '0' " ".:" , " ,', "'q.
.'
. . oj ".", .
. \ :. ~I .. '.
~
Board and Staff Discussion
Brenda Moses, Board Reporter, was introduced and welcomed as the newest member
of the City Crerk Department. team.
Mr. McCarty listed City projects to which he has been assigned as a result of
Assistant City Manager Bill Baker's unexpected retirement.
Discussion ensued regarding how to get design guidelines information to the public
before projects are designed. Mr. McCarty distributed flyers regarding three upcoming
design workshops sponsored in cooperation with the City, Chamber of Commerce and
Downtown Development Board Scheduled from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Chamber of
Commerce. the discussions will cover the design guidelines as they relate to the following
topics: Signs and Awnings, July 22; Storefronts, Windows and Doors, August 26; and
Landscaping and Streetscaping, September 30, 1996. Copies of the UC design guidelines
will be available for distribution at each meeting.
(,
Mr. Boykins expressed concern it might not have been clear to the applicants what
was being requested of them in the case of ORB 96-004, above. He questioned when the
points rating scale will be implemented. Mr. McCarty explained the complicated and time
consuming process of coordinating data from an applicant, through the Central Permitting
offices and to the board members. General discussion ensued regarding the best means of
educating the public regarding application requirements, time limits and cutoff dates. Mr.
McCartv wUl prepare a set of filing requirements for board action in conjunction with
approval of next year's meeting schedule.
Mr. Pliska questioned why an application is allowed to come before the board when it
does not meet acceptable design criteria. Ms. Dougall-Sides stated staff is compelfed by
code to accept an application if it meets the procedural criteria. Mr. Pliska pointed out the
board should establish and publicize what they want to see in an applicant's presentation,
related to elevation drawings, site plans, orientation, color scheme. et cetera. It was
noted these requirements are set forth in the design guidelines.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Attest:
!:~;(;~
'~
mdrb07a.96
4
07/09/96
~",-':,~'" ,",,';,' .':':' " '.:.,,'" '".... , ,',.,'. .>::,:.>','" .: ,~",'''.,,'':: ,':.'~" :', ';,":::'...' ,'<:" ,"" :'I:'~'..': ' >,:".',:,I'::,,:.>~......',::. ',':.'..>.::,'/
_""'" ,.,., .". " . ',' , \\' .'... i\' ,,'..., ,
"..: ", .... ," :"X..;' . 'r :...., ::',"~' f~' '. ' .':"q" " "...4' 1\ . ,',',,';;' '.. .":-~' "::..:''':','..-: . :; '. ',:< :'..;,.':'-:.,'..:
l.I"., j. I . J ' , . '. " . ., '. ,," .
I " ,., '. " . ' '.. ' " ,..' " .