Loading...
11/12/1996DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER November 12, 1996 Present: William McCann Kathy Milam Robert Herberich Mark Cagni Howard Hamilton Scott Shuford Leslie Dougall-Sides Don McCarty Gwen Legters Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Central Permitting Director Assistant City Attorney Design Planner Board Reporter   Absent: MacArthur “Mac” Boykins Alex Plisko Board Member Board Member   To provide continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in City Hall. Following the Pledge of Allegiance, he read the board’s rules of procedure. Minutes Approval -- October 22, 1996 Member Herberich requested additional language in the second paragraph on page two to indicate the gentlemen making the presentation are with Mudano and Associates, Architects. Member Herberich moved to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Proposals for Design Review 1. DRB 96-011 Burning Bridges Design Studio -- 700 Court Street, Mr. Hiram Berry Mr. McCarty presented written background information, stating the applicant is requesting consideration and approval of two identification signs directing customers to the existing small apparel business. The studio is located in the northern portion of Sybil’s clothing store at the corner of Court and East Streets. The applicant will address additional improvements for display and other building upgrades later. Staff has worked with the applicants extensively on different aspects of their proposal, including bringing signage into harmony with the design guidelines. Color graphics submitted with the board packets show two signs exhibiting similar shapes and colors. Staff recommended approval as the shapes, colors and proposed locations are consistent with the intent of the Design Guidelines. Hiram Berry, the owner/applicant, responded to questions regarding the signage. He added he wants to install a display case, similar to a bay window, bolted onto the outside of the building. He wishes to construct the display window by bending sheets of transparent polycarbonate material to create an elliptical shape projecting from the building, and adding a complementary roof treatment. Referring to sketches and 13 photographs submitted with the application, Mr. Berry detailed the surrounding neighborhood conditions and locations proposed for the display window and signs. Mr. McCarty noted the absence of elevations or scaled drawings, stating engineered drawings will be required to meet permitting and code requirements. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Mr. Berry responded to questions regarding signage and configuration of the building in which his studio is located. He said the owner of Sybil’s did not object to locating one of his signs on the front of her store. Mr. Berry’s second sign is classified as a canopy sign because it will span columns at the opening of the entranceway to his business. Two non-matching signs are to be removed from the west elevation. Board members praised the proposed signage as unique and creative, while showing attention to the design guidelines. While the signs are not identical, they show a clear relation in attention to shape, color and graphic elements. Member Milam moved to approve the signage portion of DRB 96-011, as submitted, because it is in keeping with the design guidelines. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Discussion ensued regarding the display window design, wind load calculations, and tensile strength of the polycarbonate material. Board members requested Mr. Berry to come to the next meeting with framing and elevation drawings of the window, showing how it will be attached to the building, the exact location, and the scale in relation to the existing facade, windows, and mechanical elements. In response to Mr. Berry’s question, it was indicated he may choose to submit a model in place of engineered drawings, but the model must be to scale. Discussion ensued regarding other buildings in the vicinity. Consensus was to continue review of the proposed display window to the next meeting. 2. DRB 96-016 Club Vibrations -- 22 N Ft. Harrison, Mr. Neville Rose Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations. He stated the applicant wishes to install two new business signs, one flat and one projecting, on the face of the building formerly used as the Ritz Theater, then a nightclub. Mr. McCarty met with the applicants to explain design guidelines and encouraged remodeling, restoration and utilization of the original theater marquee. The applicant had felt that approach would not give him adequate exposure at a cost he could afford. Three color graphics illustrated the proposed signs and dimensions, with the applicant’s first choice of multiple colors and two alternate color schemes. Central permitting staff has determined the size is within the allowable signage requirements. The applicant has assured staff he will not use the existing marquee for additional signage. Staff expressed concern with the building’s color scheme and overall number of colors involved. Neville Rose, President of Club Vibrations, indicated he chose red, yellow and green as the main colors for his signage because they reflect his Jamaican heritage, and to coordinate with the bright green and yellow colors of the building exterior. He said staff informed him such a color scheme is not consistent with downtown design guidelines recommendations, and had little chance of board approval. He worked with his sign contractor to develop two alternate plans for the same signage with monochromatic color schemes, one in shades of blue, the other in shades of green. George Detrapani, the sign contractor, said Mr. Rose wanted his signage to stand out and make people aware of the nightclub. Mr. Detrapani is familiar with sign restrictions in the area and designed signs he felt would be compatible with the existing building and its colors. He reiterated the two alternate designs are not what Mr. Rose wanted, but he realizes they have a better chance of approval. The proposed signs are to be internally lighted and outlined with neon to attract more attention while reducing reflected light. He felt the design is consistent with the feel of a movie theater. Discussion ensued regarding sign area calculations when neon is included. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Mr. Rose and Mr. Detrapani responded to questions regarding building and signage colors, age and type of clientele he is trying to reach, and variety of music he will feature. Some board members supported the idea of incorporating the colors relating to a particular culture, but questioned the compatibility with the surroundings. It was felt the monochromatic signs would be difficult to read. Member Herberich moved to approve DRB 96-011, for signs in the multiple colors as submitted, subject to compliance with the maximum signage area calculations required by code. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. DRB 96-012 Surf West -- 309 S Gulfview Boulevard, Mr. Steve Fowler, Architect Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations. In response to board concerns, this proposal was amended and brought back for reconsideration and approval, to satisfy a condition of variance approval. Staff met with the applicants to discuss board concerns and review the revised drawings. Additional elevation drawings show design modifications more compatible with the Tropical Seascape theme. Other details include added standing seam roofs in canopies and over stairwells; decorative iron railings; handrails and supporting wall brackets; and cedar panels and trim to reduce the amount of stucco wall face. Other exterior treatments are white-finished aluminum door and window framework and a tri-color paint scheme of gray, ivory and peach. The western window exposure will be installed at an angle to eliminate glass reflection and glare. The architect has said the owners are willing to stipulate they will not place signage, neon, or hanging displays in the windows. Staff recommended approval, stating the changes in materials, finishes, and colors represent a significant improvement and demonstrate the many concessions made by the owners with regard to a typical commercial building design. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides acknowledged variance approval was conditioned upon DRB approval, but it is the City Attorney’s opinion DRB approval would be advisory or consensus in this case, given the fact that design guidelines have not been adopted for Clearwater beach. Steve Fowler, architect for the project, displayed new elevation drawings and reviewed locations of the various proposed retail businesses within the complex. He elaborated on the changes outlined by staff regarding emergency stair arrangement, introduction of railing with a New Orleans motif, and design and orientation of various building faces. All mechanical equipment is to be enclosed in rooftop towers to provide an aesthetic view for the surrounding hotels. A plinth treatment will reduce the amount of stucco, and horizontally scored blocks will reduce the vertical scale and bring the project back to a more pedestrian oriented feeling. He felt the warm gray palette with white accents and signage are more in keeping with the Key West category recommended by the Clearwater beach task force. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Board discussion ensued regarding the small setback variance granted by the Development Code Adjustment Board. Mr. Fowler explained the exciting proposal to cant the glass downward to reduce glare while reflecting the excitement and activity of the beach and the people and provide a better view into the store. The owner wants to attract a high-quality clientele similar to Danielle’s at Pelican Walk by placing large sculptures inside to attract attention and customers. He reiterated no neon will be placed in the windows. Mr. Fowler indicated the 4- to 6-inch lap siding will likely be in wood, similar to the City Marina. One member complimented the appearance of the wood-wrapped columns, and questioned the metal roof color. Mr. Fowler said galvanized aluminum will be used if the price is right. The natural color will weather to a silvery pewter patina. He noted the marina and a restaurant to the west have baked enamel finishes, which are limited to the manufacturers’ available palette. Building identification signage will be limited. Board members praised the attention to details in the amended plan and expressed appreciation for the applicants’ good faith effort. Discussion ensued regarding whether to condition approval on having no window signage, neon, or hanging displays. Mr. McCarty and Ms. Dougall-Sides indicated it is difficult to place restrictions on the proposal since no design guidelines are in place. It was felt the statements on the record regarding materials and design treatments are sufficient. Member Milam moved to approve DRB 96-012 as submitted, because the application is in keeping with the design guidelines. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. Sandwich Board Signs -- Scott Shuford Mr. Shuford reviewed a handout indicating the City Manager has requested DRB input regarding small scale outdoor displays and sandwich board signs. Staff developed the handout to provide board members with information regarding history of the issues, challenges and opportunities, concerns and staff ideas. He requested input regarding aesthetic and design related issues. Mr. McCarty said information is being gathered from other communities regarding their treatment of these issues. Board members felt shop owners should be able to use attractive sandwich signs without blocking pedestrian traffic. Development of a procedure was suggested to allow sandwich signs, while regulating and standardizing their location, size, and appearance. Consensus was not to allow sandwich signs in vehicular oriented areas like US 19. Discussion ensued regarding the current sign code and one member’s concern about providing informational sandwich signs as a public service. 5. Outdoor Displays Mr. Shuford requested consideration of allowing outdoor displays of merchandise, but limiting their size to a percentage of storefront area. He discussed possible calculations. Board members favored outdoor displays of seasonal merchandise and flowers in pedestrian oriented areas, but stressed regulation is needed regarding safe and acceptable maximum size and display location to avoid sidewalk obstructions. Discussion ensued regarding placement of displays on the private versus the public portion of property frontage, in view of the fact that many Clearwater beach retail buildings are on the front property line. One member noted some displays, like sidewalk cafes, could be a nuisance when sidewalks are crowded, but felt that is part of the charm of living in an urban area. Board members favored allowing limited outdoor retail displays, to enhance, but not obscure building fronts, with written stipulations regarding pedestrian access and movement. Mr. McCarty requested consideration of information kiosks or business directories as an alternative to sandwich boards. The survey of Mandalay Avenue property owners had indicated their support. Discussion ensued regarding the variety of styles, complexity, and cost. Concern was expressed with taking up sidewalk space unnecessarily. Mr. McCarty suggested kiosks or directories could be included in the enhanced landscaping areas and pedestrian amenities he and City engineers are designing for the Mandalay Streetscape. Discussion ensued regarding current details of the Mandalay streetscape project. Board and Staff Discussion Member Herberich reported paint is peeling to bare metal on parts of the Pier 60 concessions building. Staff will investigate. Mr. McCarty responded to questions about streetscaping for the Winn-Dixie project. Staff will review the plans as they become more specific, to ensure similarity with what is existing. Mr. McCann expressed concern with the board’s lack of control over colors buildings are painted. It was indicated that issue was one of the more controversial items about which downtown property owners were concerned, and had not been written into the ordinance. Mr. McCann indicated the board may want to consider a code amendment if inappropriate building colors continue to come forward. He questioned regulation of storefront window displays. Mr. Shuford said the code allows DRB regulation in areas for which design guidelines are in effect. Mr. Shuford reported the City Manager has requested a comprehensive Land Development Code amendment to make it more friendly to the development community. Mr. Shuford is working with Assistant City Manager Bob Keller, and Pinellas Planning Council Executive Director Dave Healey, to comprehensively review, revise and streamline the City development regulations. City advisory board members, business leaders, and representatives from neighborhoods and the development community will comprise a steering committee and focus groups to provide input to staff. He will provide updates of the process, scheduled for completion in April, 1997. Mark Cagni will represent the DRB on the steering committee. Mr. Shuford invited board members’ ideas on ways to make the code user friendly while respecting the high quality development standards for which Clearwater is known. Concern was expressed with the idea of consolidating volunteer advisory boards due to the potential for heavy case loads. Mr. Shuford explained how streamlining the code and changing the way customers are handled within City departments will reduce the number of cases currently coming before regulatory boards. Mr. McCarty said providing more visual versus verbal illustrations will present necessary information in a more easily understood format. In response to questions from Member Milam, Mr. Shuford said signage for the new Clearwater beach Ramada Inn is not within DRB jurisdiction until beach design guidelines are established. Mr. Shuford indicated the costs reflected by design professionals who responded to the Request for Proposals were about four times the amount he was willing to request from the City. Staff is investigating other options of preparing design guidelines for the three remaining areas. Mr. Shuford said he will provide for the next meeting a list of time frames for sandwich boards and outdoor display draft concepts, Clearwater beach design guidelines, and Cleveland Streetscaping information. Ms. Milam was happy to see the new Surf West proposal. Regarding Club Vibrations, she said the board may not have liked the proposed colors, but she felt applicants have the right to choose the flavor of their businesses. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:53 p.m.