Loading...
01/14/1997DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER January 14, 1997 Present: William McCann Kathy Milam Robert Herberich Mark Cagni Alex Plisko Howard Hamilton Leslie Dougall-Sides Don McCarty Gwen Legters Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Assistant City Attorney Design Planner Board Reporter   Absent: MacArthur “Mac” Boykins Board Member   The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in the Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce Community Room, 1130 Cleveland Street. To provide continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Minutes Approval -- Friday, December 13, 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. C. Proposals for Design Review 1. DRB 96-020 Chamber of Commerce Building, Kathy Rabon, Executive Director 331 Cleveland Street (signage) This item was continued from the last meeting at the request of the applicant, for signage revisions on the west and east sides of the building. Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating today’s request is for only one building identification sign, to be located on the east side of the building. Drawings submitted in the board packets indicated colors, size, placement, and conformity with the City sign code. The sign will not be internally lit. Ms. Rabon said molded letters similar to those on the Citizen’s Bank building and the Harborview Center will be affixed to the east side of the building, lighted with gooseneck lamps. The burgundy letters will match the exterior tile trim, and will be the only signage on the building. The Laura Street signs are not to be replaced. She said a tenant identification sign request will come forward when the United Way agency moves into the building. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Member Hamilton moved to approve Item #1, DRB 96-020, as requested. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. DRB 96-021 The Ice House, Robert Schoeller, Owner (John Sykes, Architect) 632 Drew Street (building & site) This item was continued from the last meeting to allow time for staff to meet with the applicants to obtain drawings, and get the specifics necessary to prepare a staff report and summation. Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations, stressing the importance of timely implementation of the project, given the prominent location of the site and its impact on the City. Robert Schoeller and John Sykes circulated elevation drawings and site plans for the Drew Street side of the development. Discussion ensued regarding the background of the project to date, and Mr. Schoeller’s plans to implement the project. He responded to questions regarding garden work in progress, setback from Drew Street, site plan approval, and required parking associated with the business activity to be conducted. It was indicated the development will have both commercial and residential uses. Mr. McCarty said engineering site plan review will address the structural and mechanical aspects of the project. The DRB will focus on design review. One board member indicated he likes the architectural treatment of the building as proposed. Concerns were expressed with the uncertain time schedule for execution of the three phases. Board members were unclear what they were being asked to approve. Concerns were expressed with the incomplete plans being subject to change after approval. Mr. Schoeller said, while he wanted to start and complete the project as soon as possible, the drawings he submitted were designs, not working drawings. He was reluctant to bring forward specific designs until it is known whether or not DRC site plan approval will be obtained. Concerns were expressed the applicant is still not ready to implement the project, and completion could stretch out for several years. It was indicated both DRB and Development Review Committee (DRC) approvals are valid for one year. Mr. McCarty suggested board members decide whether or not to approve the concept of the overall master plan. If the applicant chooses to implement his project in phases, design approval of each phase could be requested, with time extensions requested as needed. If the building permits for the approved improvements are not pulled within a year, the applicant would have to reapply, meeting any criteria adopted in the interim. Mr. Schoeller expressed an interest in proceeding with his project in three phases: 1) the garden; 2) the building on Drew Street; and 3) a colonnade connecting the two buildings. The board cautioned Mr. Schoeller appropriate maintenance of each completed phase would be required pending project completion. One member noted the lack of workers on the site, and expressed concern the applicant may not have been exerting a contentious effort to get through the project. Another member explained the DRB was created to be a user friendly board, charged with promoting timely improvements to downtown buildings, not allowing developments to linger incomplete. Mr. Schoeller explained some of the reasons the project has been delayed and said he is ready to move forward now. He complained of miscommunications with staff regarding the site plan approval process. Mr. McCarty related a chronology of what the applicants were told with regard to the application process. Discussion ensued regarding the factors involved in engineering versus design review. While the majority of the members felt the concept is good, concerns were expressed the back- out parking onto Drew Street is illegal, and renovation of the former air conditioning building does not appear to be part of the current plan. Member Herberich moved to approve the site plan design concept for Item #2, DRB 96-021, subject to City Engineering and Zoning approvals; removal of the back-out parking along Drew Street; and addressing the facade of the existing air-conditioning building. Any modifications of the design as submitted shall require a new hearing before this board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Schoeller was advised to call Mr. McCarty in the Central Permitting Department for guidance with regard to starting the certified site plan process. 3. DRB 97-001 Pinch-A-Penny, Bob Aude, Architect 651 Court Street (building & site) Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant wishes to remodel the former Badcock Furniture building. A portion of the building’s front will be removed, restoring the front setback and returning to the original footprint. The new building front will be created to form an entrance patio and covered canopy. The north elevation will feature a pitched roof and new columns to reflect some of the design elements of the adjacent train station. Staff felt the project has the potential for a good development, but many details and enhancements are unknown related to a blank east wall in the view corridor, parking in the front yard areas, restricted vehicular circulation, and lack of landscaping or site amenities. Robert Aude, architect representing the applicant, referred to a January 7 letter submitted with the proposed site plan and elevation drawings. He profiled project details as follows: 1) the proposed use as a Pinch-A-Penny retail store; 2) north and east elevation features; 3) signage; and 4) “Key West” monochromatic color theme in shades of gray and white. He elaborated further regarding: 1) proposed use of floor space; 2) creating a building scale compatible with the train station and “Key West” theme; 3) fenestration, roof pitch and other architectural details; and 4) conditions on surrounding properties. Mr. Aude displayed a photograph of the existing building. Discussion ensued regarding the elevation drawings illustrating the proposed colors, facade design, and signage. The potential exists for a professionally created graphic, mural, or similar treatment on the south elevation, to reflect the theme of the adjacent train station and Pinellas Trail. The owner is receptive to including a graphic on the east wall as well, to break up the blank expanse. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Board members were pleased with the prospect of a pool store in downtown. In response to questions, Mr. Aude explained no additional doors or windows are proposed in the east wall, because of the high demand for interior wall space to display retail products. He explained a short construction time frame is required in order to accomplish needed repairs before the busy season. He the building to the east is not part of the Pinch-A-Penny Store. The owner hopes to hold it aside for a special future use related to the trail. Discussion ensued regarding numerous buildings shown on the plans, all held by the same owner. While the applicants were applauded for their efforts to date, concerns were expressed with the lack of landscaping and other details the board would expect to see as part of an application packet of this nature. Discussion ensued regarding building use; potential for outdoor display; signage; type of pavement replacing the front portion of the building; the tree survey; parking calculations; and pedestrian accesses after the trail goes in. It was indicated signage and landscaping will be brought back as a separate application. A question was raised regarding whether a back door is required. Mr. Aude will investigate in conjunction with the site plan review. Member Plisko moved to approve Item #3, DRB 97-001, for design of the exterior building front as submitted. The remainder of the site plan will have to be brought back for DRB review. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. DRB 97-002 Hughes Supply, Inc., Jon Lyon, Branch Manager 951 Pierce Street (canopy/awning) Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant wishes to place a small canopy/awning on the front across the main entrance of the existing metal building. According to the canopy contractor, the small canopy support columns meet structural requirements and will not be changed due the additional cost involved. Staff recommended approval, but felt more substantial columns or distinctive support elements were preferable. Jon Lyon and Ted Turner addressed the board, stating among their product line are various types of pool equipment and supplies sold at wholesale. They requested prompt approval of a replacement canopy, because rain has been coming through the front door. They displayed color samples of the recently repainted building, showing an ivory background with deep blue trim and graphics. The Hughes Supply emblem and colors shown on their business cards will be reflected on the metal canopy, and backlit for emphasis. Mr. Turner explained they would rather not have canopy supports, but the columns are needed to support the metal structure. The columns will be painted the same color as the building to minimize their appearance. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Member Plisko moved to approve Item #4, DRB 97-002, as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. DRB 97-003 Old World Deli, Clyde Hall, Owner 11 Jefferson Avenue (signage) Mr. McCarty presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant wishes to install two signs on the canopy faces of the existing building. The applicant has worked extensively with Central Permitting staff to design signage that meets square footage requirements and design criteria. Sign dimensions and the hunter green and black lettering on a white background were illustrated in the board packets. Photographs submitted with the application show the existing building on the corner of Cleveland Street and Jefferson Avenue. Mr. Hall described the proposed signage design and placement on the existing facades. He verified the proposal meets sign area requirements. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Member Milam moved to approve Item #5, DRB 97-003, as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Hall was invited to talk about his new deli business in the former Donnell’s catering building. He will specialize in sausages and other ethnic dishes, and will open daily for lunch. The public was invited to sample his fare on Saturday, January 18 from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The following Monday will be the first day of business. D. Preliminary Mandalay Avenue Streetscape Design Mr. McCarty introduced Diane Hufford, with the City’s Economic Development Department, who was present to hear the presentation. He displayed a color graphic and gave an overview of the preliminary design, from Pier 60 park, north to Baymont Street. He said, after viewing the proposal, the City Management Team asked staff to look into incorporating some more extensive alternatives into the design. Discussion ensued regarding types of landscaping; sidewalk and crosswalk finishes, pavers; clustering groups of palms at crosswalks and intersections; coordinating pedestrian furniture, street lighting, bike racks and waste receptacles. A bronze color theme was chosen over black or green. In response to a question, he detailed locations of bike racks. Board members favored: 1) the appearance and durability of brick pavers over a stamped concrete finish; 2) the concept of using street treatments, landscaping and stop signs to calm traffic and bring it down to a pedestrian level; 3) getting rid of overhead power lines. Mr. McCarty emphatically agreed that underground power lines and mast arm traffic signals are essential to an aesthetic streetscape design. Board and Staff Discussion 1. Annual Review of DRB Rules of Procedure Mr. McCarty submitted modifications he prepared to bring the rules into agreement with board procedures. Member Plisko questioned whether minimum submittal requirements could be added. He felt it is important for the board to receive rough sketches showing sign placement, and site plans showing landscaping. General discussion ensued regarding minimum submittal requirements, and the most effective means of presenting such written requirements. Board members will review the amended rules for adoption at the next meeting. 2. Election of Board Officers Member Milam nominated William McCann for reelection as Chair. Mr. McCann accepted the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, William McCann was unanimously reelected as Chair. Member Hamilton nominated Kathy Milam for reelection as Vice Chair. Member Milam accepted the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Kathy Milam was unanimously reelected as Vice Chair. 3. Other Issues Mr. McCarty said Mr. Shuford has indicated the Land Development Code rewrite in progress will represent a phenomenal change in the community; the way proposals come forward; the way approvals are obtained; and the advisory board application process. Charts and tables are proposed to simplify language. Mr. McCarty reported design guidelines are being written for the Clearwater beach area. He hopes to bring a draft to the next meeting. Member Plisko expressed concern the board is not at its full complement of members. He requested staff to determine whether Mr. Boykins intends to continue serving on the board. Board members wished Mr. Boykins a speedy recovery. Discussion ensued regarding the difference between murals, billboards, and graffiti. In response to a question from Member Milam, Mr. McCarty said Assistant City Manager Bob Keller is meeting with Alan Ferri, Winn-Dixie, and Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, regarding the Winn-Dixie development proposal along Cleveland Street. Discussion ensued regarding the delays frequently experienced by public/private partnerships, related to the complicated grant funding involved. Member Milam reported she will not attend the February 11, 1997 DRB meeting. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.