12/13/1996DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF CLEARWATER
December 13, 1996
Present Kathy Milam Vice Chair
Robert Herberich Board Member
Mark Cagni Board Member
Howard Hamilton Board Member
Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Don McCarty Design Planner
Gwen Legters Board Reporter
Absent: : William McCann Chair
MacArthur “Mac” Boykins Board Member
Alex Plisko Board Member
The Vice Chair called the meeting to order 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 - November 26, 1996
Member Hamilton 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.
Proposals for Design Review
1. DRB 96-011 Burning Bridges Design Studio – Hiram Berry, Owner
700 Court Street
Mr. McCarty stated this item was continued from the November 12 meeting for board review of Mr. Berry’s proposed “products display window.” While the applicant had indicated he was
ready to make a presentation, he has since requested a continuance. Consensus was to continue to the next meeting.
2. DRB 96 020 Chamber of Commerce Building, Kathy Rabon, Executive Director 331 Cleveland Street
Mr. McCarty presented written staff report and recommendations, stating the applicant is seeking approval of signage for their new Cleveland Street location, at the former Citizens
Bank Building. Preliminary discussions with the applicant indicate all proposed signage will comply with the City sign code. Final drawings and details have not been submitted.
Kathy Rabon, Clearwater Chamber of Commerce Executive Director, addressed the board. Referring to her written proposal, she requested a continuance of items #1 and #2, relating to
signage on the west and east sides of the building. She requested board approval today of signage on the existing awning in front of the building, as illustrated in photographs submitted
with the application packet. She proposed to have the name, “Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce,” in six-inch high white lettering, professionally sewn or silk screened onto the
burgundy awning over the Cleveland Street entrance.
No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed.
Member Cagni moved to approve DRB 96 020, for awning signage only, as requested by the applicant. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
3. DRB 96 021 The Ice House, Robert Schoeller, Owner (John Sykes, Architect)
632 Drew Street
Mr. McCarty reported he had not received any information regarding this application as of 1:00 p.m. today, and was unable to prepare written recommendations. The board was interested
in hearing some type of presentation, but pointed out a decision might not follow, due to lack of documentation. Mr. McCarty concurred the decision can be made later, but stressed the
importance of board direction to the applicant regarding a time table. Staff stressed the importance of submitting drawings, site plans, and timely implementation of the project, given
the prominent location of the site and its impact on the City.
John Sykes stated he submitted drawings today, in accordance with Mr. McCarty’s request. He gave the background of the project to date, explaining it has taken a lot of time to repoint
and regrout the existing structure to make it safe. Mr. Schoeller is from Vienna, and likes a classical style of architecture and design, which takes additional time. He submitted
drawings of the proposed design as seen from Drew Street, looking south from the garden in back. It was indicated Mr. Schoeller is an artist of renown.
Robert Schoeller, the owner/applicant, responded to questions, stating the building is to be his residence. Elevation drawings were presented an reviewed at length.
Mr. Schoeller responded to questions, stating he owns the entire block and wishes to make it “his world,” so he feels comfortable aesthetically. Some of the rooms will be used for
a studio, some for hanging his paintings, some rooms private. He was not able to pinpoint a time frame for implementation or completion of the refurbishment. He elaborated on project
details, such as creating a gallery from the existing loading dock on Drew Street, starting the garden within a few months, and plumbing and mechanical installations inside the building.
Mr. McCarty responded to questions regarding site plan approval, reflecting pools, landscaping in the interior spaces, and required parking associated with the business activity to
be conducted in conjunction with the studio. The site plan is not ready for engineering review and today’s presentation is the first time Mr. McCarty had seen elevation drawings and
renderings.
Staff will meet with the applicants to get the specifics necessary to prepare a staff report, summation, and obtain drawings.
Board discussion ensued regarding the impressive proposal, the location, and controversial history of the site. One member questioned the projected opening date for the gallery. Mr. Schoeller
responded he has experienced problems finding anyone in Florida who can do the custom masonry work he requires. While he said he wanted to start as soon as possible, he would not venture
a guess until the site plan is approved. He explained at length why it appears nothing has happened during the considerable time since he started the project. He detailed a complicated
process of molding custom sandstone-looking masonry materials, the amount of time spent gutting the building, removing 700 tons of debris, restoring brickwork, roofs, ceilings, and windows.
He said there was never a time when nothing was happening, but nothing was apparent from the street side. No one knew what was depicted was inside. He said he researched his design
in Europe. He is dealing with a nursery for large selected palm trees, similar to those seen in past centuries. He hopes to create a unified environment with a lot of water, trees,
and palms.
In response to questions from Mr. McCarty, Mr. Schoeller listed details regarding finishes, materials, and colors on the Drew Street Side of the property. Mr. McCarty explained the
purpose, use and intent of the design guidelines for the downtown district. Because of the scale and finishes described, he will meet with the applicants to finalize details and schedule
them to come back with a more comprehensive presentation.
The board thanked the applicants for appearing, encouraged them to work closely with staff, and to keep moving ahead with the project. Consensus was to continue this item to the January 14
meeting, if feasible.
4. DRB 96 022 City of Clearwater City Hall
110 South Osceola Avenue
Mr. McCarty presented written staff reports and recommendations, stating the City is doing minor building upgrades to bring fire sprinkler and exiting requirements into compliance with
the life safety code. It is necessary to create a separate fire exit from a stairwell to the exterior. The proposed exit and stairs will be constructed on the north stairwell on the
west side of the building. He distributed drawings of the proposal and overall view of the west elevation, showing the position of the stair exit between the first and second floors.
Jim Wood, City Building and Maintenance Department supervisor, gave an overview of the configuration options. He said the materials will match the building’s exterior, handrails, etc.
Board members pointed out handrails and stair risers depicted in the plans do not follow NFPA or ADA codes. Discussion ensued regarding building codes versus life safety codes, and
how the plans will look when all appropriate codes are met. Mr. McCarty related alternatives regarding potential handrail design. He will meet with City Building and Maintenance staff
to finalize the design. In response to questions, Mr. Wood said construction will start on January 13. He has been given two months to complete the project. Discussion ensued regarding
how the project progressed to this point without code compliance. Board members suggested a continuance and requested revised drawings in time for the next meeting.
Discussion continued regarding design alternatives. Mr. McCarty pointed out compliance with stair hand rail design standards is extremely difficult due to the number of contradictory
codes involved. He will work with staff on final drawings for the January meeting. In response to questions, Mr. Wood said sufficient funds have been allocated for the project. Mr.
McCarty said retrofitting the building was intended to make City Hall usable for three to five years, to allow time to study which is more appropriate: a complete retrofit; continuing
with the building as it is by adapting to meet requirements; or replacing the building. The City Commission does not want to become involved in an extensive project involving a lot
of funds at this time.
Member Herberich moved to accept the proposal, subject to compliance with Figure 19 of NFPA 101, the Standard Building Code, and use of aluminum railing to match those in use on the
existing building, without a screening mesh.
Some board members were not comfortable approving a concept for which final plans have not been prepared. It was felt to be more appropriate of the City to revise the plans, correcting
the necessary details, before bringing the issue to the DRB. Other members were satisfied with the project as presented, subject to the conditions stated in the motion. Mr. McCarty
did not think adding one tread would significantly change the overall appearance, as long as the handrails stay the same. He said the Central Permitting Department and Plans Review
will sign off on the plan when it meets code.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Board and Staff Discussion
Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford arrived to ask the board for direction regarding a proposed code amendment regarding outdoor sales/displays in conjunction with conforming
indoor retail sales uses. The draft, prepared late in 1994, was copied into the board packets. If the board is comfortable with the general concept as presented in the draft, he will
incorporate the ordinance into the Land Development Code revision process. He explained staff proposes to allow limited outdoor displays without the need for seeking a conditional use
permit.
Leslie Dougall-Sides left the meeting at 3:50 p.m.
Mr. Shuford thanked the board for attending today’s special meeting. He responded to questions regarding outdoor displays and sandwich board signs, stating the must not interfere with
pedestrians or motor vehicles, should be portable and not permanently attached. The intent is not for a permanent outdoor display, but to allow things likely to be brought in at night
when the facility is closed. Concern was expressed it will be difficult for any business to meet all the requirements of subsection #2. Discussion ensued regarding whether any locations
exist on Clearwater beach that provide opportunities to have outdoor displays while maintaining a five-foot minimum clear area. Mr. Shuford discussed setback requirements in the General
Commercial district. He will look at the amendment to see how it could affect some areas of non-conforming buildings. In response to questions, he said the ordinance will apply City-wide.
Staff will put together a more organized program for a general concept regarding sandwich board signs. The DRB will not be responsible for approving the designs. He will bring the
ordinance back in a more finished form, along with illustrations. The item will proceed through
Planning and Zoning Board and Development Code Adjustment Board review before going to the City commission.
Member Hamilton expressed concern regarding vending machines and news racks in front of Clearwater beach businesses. He said he has asked to have them removed from the front of his
business numerous times, without success. Mr. Shuford said placement of news racks has become a first amendment issue, and the City is limited in the number of things that can be done.
He suggested contacting the City’s Community Response Team, which wrote the existing regulations and coordinates the compliance process through the newspaper companies.
Mr. McCarty distributed a copy of the Mandalay Avenue Streetscape survey, and the tabulated results. Messrs. Shuford and McCarty wished board members a happy holiday season.
Mr. McCarty reminded board members the annual review of the board’s rules of procedure will be due at the first meeting in January. A question was raised regarding whether a full complement
of board members exists. Mr. McCarty responded he has not received any letters of resignation.
In response to a question regarding status of the City Annex demolition, Mr. Shuford said Assistant City Manager Bob Keller has expressed an interest in looking at proposals that will
generate jobs in the City. Member Milam was encouraged by the opening vista and looked forward to seeing the property redeveloped. Mr. McCarty agreed, stating the board will be seeing
fewer non-conforming setbacks and landscaping situations as new developments progress throughout the City. Other exciting new developments mentioned were the proposed A to Be School,
Win-Dixie downtown plaza, and Mr. Schoeller’s “palace.”
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:04 p.m.
Chair
Design Review Board
Attest:
Board Reporter