Loading...
10/22/1996DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER October 22, 1996 Present: William McCann Robert Herberich Mark Cagni Alex Plisko Howard Hamilton Leslie Dougall-Sides Don McCarty Gwen Legters Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Assistant City Attorney Design Planner Board Reporter   Absent: Kathy Milam MacArthur “Mac” Boykins Vice Chair Board Member   The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 3:00 p.m. in City Hall. To provide continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Minutes Approval - October 8, 1996 Member McCann requested an amendment in the last paragraph on page 4, regarding the RFP for a design guidelines consultant. The fourth sentence was corrected to read, “…an important part of the interviewguideline development process is to have the applicantsconsultants appear before the DRB for input into the design guidelines.” Member Plisko moved to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Proposals for Design Review 1. DRB 96-014 MID-TOWN PLAZA - Winn Dixie/NHS Proposal N.E. Corner/Cleveland Street & Myrtle Avenue -- Mudano Associates Architects Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations. The applicant proposes a major redevelopment project with a substantial aesthetic and economic impact on downtown revitalization. The Cleveland Street frontage will make a significant design statement. Staff will evaluate the site development, landscaping and streetscape design, parking and property access, building orientation, design elements, and overall design community impact. It is hoped the project will have a positive impact on downtown and encourage other redevelopment. Mr. McCarty detailed pedestrian features, parking, ingress/egress, and specialized architectural treatments. Proportion, massing, and scale are sensitive to other building types downtown. He felt this project will be an asset for downtown Clearwater. The petitioner had expressed concern their graphics reproduction did not reflect the exact colors they wanted to present to the board. Staff recommended approval, as the project is consistent with the design guidelines. Nancy Hansen, Economic Development Specialist, spoke on behalf of Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, the developer. She said this $5 million project is funded by private, federal, local government and nonprofit sources. Steve Lafferty and Brad Harris, with Mudano and Associates, Architects, discussed the property’s history and surrounding uses. Referring to conceptual elevation drawings, Mr. Harris explained in detail how the colors, surroundings, site layout, and plaza embellishments will provide an aesthetic quality the public will enjoy. He specified how exterior design of the prototype Winn-Dixie store will be enhanced to tie into its surroundings. Ms.  Hansen stated the tenant mix for the retail shops has not been determined. She said kiosk or cart sales may be incorporated into the wide landscaping strip along Cleveland Street. Isay Gulley, Executive Director of Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, thanked the board for working with staff and the developers to support the project. She felt it a good way to help the City. The board thanked her for putting the project together. Board discussion ensued regarding sidewalk layout. It was indicated one of the selling points of a downtown supermarket was convenient pedestrian access. Board members felt the site would be more pedestrian friendly with additional perimeter sidewalks and an interior walkway through the parking lot between the retail shops and the supermarket. Mr. Lafferty noted Winn-Dixie’s strong parking requirement and the need for wide perimeter landscaping buffers between parking areas and street thoroughfares. Mr. McCarty noted the project will go for certified site plan review to ensure it meets requirements. He agreed incorporating a walkway through the parking lot merits further discussion. Board members offered suggestions how this might be accomplished. Discussion ensued regarding the vacation of Laura Street, review of the signage package as a separate entity, and vehicular access to surrounding streets and alleyways. Mr. Shuford stated the proposal represents cooperation between the public and private sectors needed to enliven downtown. He affirmed the scope of the development is larger than one would expect from reviewing the drawings. A question was raised how future expansion will affect the parking requirement. Ms. Hansen responded Winn-Dixie has reviewed and approved the existing parking plan as sufficient to accommodate any future expansion. One member praised the development for its similarity in scale and design relationship to surrounding businesses. Mr. Shuford and Mr. McCarty concurred, strongly recommending approval. Member Herberich moved to approve DRB 96-014, subject to staff review of the pedestrian elements, because the application is in keeping with the design guidelines. Questions were raised regarding how to incorporate the necessary pedestrian elements into the motion. Mr. Shuford said increasing certain perimeter sidewalks will not be a problem, but felt making a pedestrian connection through the parking lot will be a challenge. He will investigate: 1) transferring some of the green space along Myrtle Avenue into the center of the project to create a walkway through the parking lot; and 2) the possibility of putting some of the perimeter landscaping in the City right-of-way. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Board and Staff Discussion At the last meeting the board was asked to provide input regarding two designs on Clearwater beach. Mr. Shuford apologized for putting board members in the uncomfortable position of reviewing proposals without design guidelines or clear staff direction. He acknowledged the need for more comprehensive staff direction and input to help board members through the design review and decision making process. In the future he hoped members will share rationale for their concerns, to avoid misunderstandings with staff and applicants. He stressed the design review process is very important and urged members to exercise the same sensitivity and flexibility they would expect from someone reviewing their designs. Discussion ensued regarding specific examples from the last meeting. Mr. Herberich had wished to indicate, based on his professional experience, the colors proposed for the Pier 60 concessions sign make it difficult to read for a large segment of the population who cannot easily differentiate certain colors. Mr. Plisko reiterated his strong opposition to the Surf West project, stating the design is oriented to vehicular traffic and is out of character with the pedestrian style established for Clearwater beach. Mr. Shuford pointed out the situation could have been improved if two points had been clarified: 1) the board’s concern with the potential of the large window area to be used for excessive retail display; and 2) DRB review had been a condition of variance approval. After reviewing the design consultant proposals, Mr. Shuford will report how he proposes to consolidate and streamline board and staff interactions while remaining sensitive to design guidelines. In response to Mr. Shuford’s request for input, board members found today’s staff report format very effective for large presentations, but felt it could be excessively time consuming for Mr. McCarty if provided for every application. Mr. McCarty distributed an amended 1997 meeting schedule. It is possible the City Hall building will be closed for renovations during the early part of next year. He will advise board members once an alternate meeting location is determined. Member Herberich moved to approve the amended 1997 meeting schedule. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:59 p.m.