Loading...
11/25/1997DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER November 25, 1997 Present: William McCann Chair Robert Herberich Board Member Alex Plisko Board Member Mark Cagni Board Member Tony Shoemaker Interim Central Permitting Director Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Don McCarty Design Planner Gwen Legters Board Reporter Absent: MacArthur “Mac” Boykins Board Member Kathy Milam Vice Chair Howard Hamilton Board Member The meeting was called to order at 3:07 p.m. in City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance and review of board procedures followed. Interim Central Permitting Director Tony Shoemaker was introduced and welcomed to the meeting. To provide continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Minutes Approval - October 14, 1997 Member Cagni 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 97-024 Church of Scientology, FSO, Inc. 711 Cleveland Street -- The Mariner -- (Signage; Sign Face Replacement) Mr. McCarty presented background information stating the applicant wishes to replace signage at an existing motel. James Bond, representing the applicant, presented a color graphic, sign elevation drawing, and site plan showing replacement of an existing lighted sign at the former Travelodge location. The sign face will be changed to reflect the new name, “The Mariner.” It was indicated the sign is cantilevered from the building’s deck structure, projecting into the Cleveland Street right-of-way, perpendicular to the building. Mr. Bond has indicated the sign structure might need replacement in four to five years due to its age and condition. While the design guidelines do not recommend internally lighted signs, Mr. McCarty stated that if the board approves this sign face design, it should be conditioned upon the applicant removing and replacing the sign structure consistent with the Land Development Code, when refurbishment becomes necessary. Strong concerns were expressed with the sign’s non-conforming location in the right-of-way. Discussion ensued regarding State law, City code, permitting requirements, and design guidelines regarding the sign face and structure. Ms Dougall-Sides indicated code compliance will be determined by Central Permitting, and recommended the board to consider whether the design is consistent with design guidelines. Mr. Bond stated the applicant is willing not to light the sign if interior lighting is a problem for downtown. The attempt is not to advertise, but to replace signage in an existing enclosure. Member Plisko moved to deny DRB 97024 as the proposal does not meet the intent of the design guidelines; the sign is similar to a freestanding pole sign with a horizontal beam instead of a pole; the sign does not meet current standards for setback from street right-of-way; and internally lighted signs are not recommended in the downtown district although the applicant has agreed not to back light the sign. The board does not object to the proposed sign face design, but to sign placement. The motion was duly seconded. Members Herberich, Plisko, and Cagni voted “Aye;” Member McCann voted “Nay.” Motion carried. Mr. McCarty notified the applicant of the right to appeal today’s decision to the City Commission. He stated staff is willing to work with the applicant regarding sign redesign and placement. Mr. Shoemaker left the meeting at 3:27 p.m. 2. DRB 97-025 Club More – “Flash” Gordon Williamson, Owner 704 Court Street / 703 Franklin Street -- (Signage; Replacement/Exchange) Mr. McCarty presented background information stating the applicant proposes two signs; a building identification sign using the Club More logo, and a changeable reader board. If the new signage is approved, the applicant must remove existing signage along Court Street to meet zoning requirements for maximum signage area. “Flash” Gordon Williamson, owner/applicant, wishes to replace signage identifying his outdoor furniture business to give more visibility to the nightclub on site. He related details of his after hours entertainment concept for downtown. He and his sign contractor have had several meetings with Mr. McCarty to discuss sign fabrication and lighting details. He referred to a color graphic, stating green and gold neon tubing behind transparent channel letters will give color to the sign. He responded to questions regarding sign area calculations. Concerns were expressed the proposed logo sign is not legible with the word “more” superimposed over the word, “club” in the same plane. The sign contractor explained fabrication details. It was indicated the visual effect of visible neon tubing behind the transparent sign face will achieve an appropriate visual effect for this type of business. In response to a question, Mr. McCarty reiterated his concerns about legibility, but noted the logo is consistent with other materials associated with the club’s business activities. Mr. Vernon acknowledged the sign probably won’t be legible during the day, but had no doubts it would be readable at night. One member supported the proposal, with its contrasting colors between sign sections, stating the design is in line with the business operation. He felt it was not crucial for the sign to be readable, as the logo will be recognized. One member felt the abrupt square corners of the reader board seemed stark compared to the logo. The sign contractor had no problem rounding the corners, but stressed the need for the reader board to be legible as it is relatively small for its 20-foot height. Due to limited color availability, the changeable letters will be black. The fixed “live music” text will be green to match the surrounding sign case. The reader board will be externally lighted. Member Cagni moved to approve DRB 97025, with the stipulation the “live music” sign shall have rounded corners as discussed above. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. DRB 97-026 – Clearwater Academy, International -- Graham Design Assoc., Architects 801 Drew Street - (New Building / Site Landscaping; Fencing) Mr. McCarty presented background information stating the applicant proposes a totally new development at the corner of Drew Street and Myrtle Avenue. The new structure and its associated parking, landscaping, fencing, and colors will be discussed today. Jim Graham, architect representing the applicant, presented colored renderings, a site plan and elevation drawings of the proposal. He detailed site configuration for a school playground away from the traffic area, parking, tree locations and health, lunchroom, activities, and office areas. As the school will serve pre-Kindergarten through high school children, staggered arrival and departure times will facilitate traffic flow. Discussion ensued regarding traffic ingress/egress, staff/visitor parking areas and orientation of an interior chain link fence to protect children from the parking area. Wooden fences on two sides will separate the school from adjacent residential and commercial properties. Signage design will be brought back for board approval when final determination is received. Building colors will reflect the school colors of blue, green and gray. A blue tile pattern and green handrails in a three-inch mesh pattern will be used in the entryway stair corridor. Gymnasium windows will be reflective, insulated glass, in a repeating pattern along the building’s length. A gray galvanized aluminum roof will repeat school colors. Discussion ensued regarding landscaping, locations of large trees on site, and stormwater retention. Discussion ensued regarding budget restraints causing the need for the building to be constructed of a metal framework. While the project’s architect thought a Key West style was wanted for downtown, the applicants expressed the desire for a contemporary feel. On his third attempt, Mr. Graham said he felt he had achieved a design that would satisfy the applicant while fitting within the design guidelines framework. Discussion ensued regarding exterior design features, and locations of other contemporary style buildings in the downtown core. Mr. McCarty noted any future changes to exterior structural or aesthetic features, as detailed in documentation submitted and approved by the board, would require additional board approval. Mr. Graham stated he understood that any changes to the designs submitted today will have to come back for board approval. He did not know what time school is proposed to start, but reiterated the arrival and departure times will be staggered to facilitate traffic flow. He highlighted the vehicle stacking area. In response to questions, Mr. Graham said a four-foot wide landscaping strip can be provided between the front of the building and a drainage retention area. One corner of the lot slopes down, creating an opportunity for stormwater retention on site. Board members complimented Mr. Graham on his aesthetic treatment of the building. Member Cagni moved to approve DRB 97026, providing no additional “value engineering” occurs that results in exterior design changes from what was submitted today. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. McCarty will continue to work with the applicants through the construction process. Additional information regarding the proposed wooden fencing will be needed before a permit can be issued. Board and Staff Discussion Member McCann extended happy holiday greetings to all. 1. Proposed 1998 DRB Meeting Schedule Discussion ensued regarding how to manage potential schedule conflicts related to holidays. Consensus was not to schedule meetings during the weeks of Memorial Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. While some favored a one meeting per month schedule, it was felt to be difficult to fast track certain requests under such a scenario. Member Plisko moved to approve the 1998 meeting schedule, deleting the meetings of May 26 and November 24. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. The 1997 Downtown Award Winners Mr. McCarty said the November issue of Right Downtown Clearwater has reported the design award winners for downtown projects. He noted all are projects that have come before the DRB. Board members felt it was unfortunate the architects who designed the projects were not mentioned. Concern was expressed the Clearwater Train Station received honorable mention, as it did not follow design guidelines recommendations. Mr. McCarty commented the train station remodel was not done as a restoration, and was not consistent with the station’s original design. In response to questions regarding the Pinch-A-Penny/Clearwater Train Station site: 1) it was not known whether a propane gas display near the east entrance of was legal: 2) a changeable message sign over the doorway was approved by the DRB and DCAB; and 3) trees were removed from the site along the Pinellas Trail, and a parking lot was built despite a condition of DRB approval that this not be done. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:17 p.m.