Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.14.00Historic Preservation Board Meeting Notice Date: September 14, 2000 Location Sanford City Hall City Commission Chambers 300 North Park Avenue Sanford, Florida 32771 Time: 5:00 P.M. AGENDA L Call to Order IL Roll Call - excused and un- excused absences III. Approval of Minutes - July 13, 2000 & August 10, 2000 IV. Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness - Commercial A. 201 Magnolia Avenue (Helen Stairs Theatre) Marque sign B. 112 S. Park Avenue Place company logo on existing awning C. 215 S. Oak Avenue Re -roof, stucco and paint exterior, install light pole, wall sign V. Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness - Residential A. 317 Palmetto Avenue Convert house to a two -car garage B. 1004 Palmetto Avenue Install two columns at front of house C. 1307 Park Avenue (Rose Cottage Tea Room) (tabled 7- 13 -00) Build 800 sq. ft. addition. Plans available at meeting. VL Discussion regarding Meeting with City Commission regarding Code Enforcement (Charles Rowe) VII. Information Items A. Minor Reviews B. Update of recent Code Violation Letters C. First Street Gateway Signage D. Downtown Redevelopment Plan Draft VIII. Discussion regarding Certified Local Government - Fred Rodgers IX. Other Business X. Adjournment ADVICE TO THE PUBLIC If a person decides to appeal a decision made with respect to any matter considered at the above meeting or hearing, he /she may need a verbatim record of the proceedings, including the testimony and evidence, which record is not provided by the City of Sanford (FS 286.0105). Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the Personnel Office ADA Coordinator at 407 - 330 -5626, no later than 48 hours in advance ofthe meeting. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 5:00 P.M. CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL SANFORD, FLORIDA MEMBERS PRESENT: Scott Singeisen Bob Kuhn Claudia Weber Barbara Farrell Walt Padgett Mary Valente Barbara Knowles Fred Rogers Julia Goeb Alexander Then MEMBERS ABSENT: Eline Ransom OTHERS PRESENT: Antonia Gerli, Staff Liaison Marion Anderson, Recording Secretary The Chairman called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M., introducing the new member, Alexander Then. Ms. Farrell moved to approve the Minutes of July 13, 2000. Seconded by Mr. Rogers. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Padgett moved to approve the Minutes of August 10, 2000. Seconded by Ms. Farrell. All in favor. Motion carried. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Commercial: 201 Magnolia Avenue (Helen Stairs Theatre) - marquee sign. Mike Fitzpatrick, Bluewater signs, 216 Lakeview Drive, Sanford, represented the request. He stated that the sign would have lighted cabinets that would fit on each section along with a standard fluorescent back -lit, with a flex face. The rear of the fan portion will have a neon tube to give a back lit appearance to the arch of the fan. In the triangle, in the center, there will be some spots to shine up the face of the fan to give it a glow look. The letters will silhouette the background. Mr. Rogers moved to approve as submitted. Seconded by Ms. Farrell. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Fitzpatrick submitted an application for a sign at First Guaranty Mortgage on Park Avenue. He stated that it would be a hanging, double- sided, sandblasted redwood. The sign will be 20 "x30 ". Ms. Farrell moved to approve as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Kuhn. All in favor. Motion carried. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGE 2 Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Commercial: 112 S. Park Avenue - place company logo on existing awning. David Stephens, 1008 Black Willow Drive, Oviedo, was present. He stated that the Pacesetter logo would be centered and the Personnel Services would be in one corner on the front to the right of the logo. The front of the building is roughly 16'. The whole sign is roughly 42'. Pacesetter logos only will be placed on the two ends. Ms. Webber moved to approve as submitted. Ms. Farrell requested that dimensions be noted and that the sign conform with the dimensions. Ms. Webber withdrew her motion to approve and moved to table the request until the applicant could measure the front of the building and return before the meeting is over. Seconded by Mr. Rogers. All in favor. Motion carried; Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Commercial: 215 S. Oak Avenue - reroof, stucco and paint exterior, install light pole, wall sign. John Robbins, 1237 Cardinal Lane, Deland, was present. He stated that they would like to remove and replace the lean -to shed roof with similar materials; stucco the existing block and paint the exterior; replace driveway /parking concrete; install new pole light on 6 "x6" steel pole at the exterior; install new lighted wall sign; increase the front flat roof slope, 6" maximum, to drain water properly; replace broken glass and windows; replace existing office entry doors; change warehouse doors to decorative type doors; and exterior paint colors are to match existing. Motions and recommendations were as follows: Replacing roof with similar metal: Ms. Farrell moved to approve the replacement of the metal roof with a similar crimped metal roof. Seconded by Ms. Webber. All in favor. Motion carried. Replacing driveway /parking concrete: Ms. Farrell moved to approve new concrete as existing, removing the old. Seconded by Ms. Knowles. All in favor. Motion carried. Install new pole light on 6 "x6" steel pole: Mr. Rogers moved to table until the applicant can bring back different examples. Seconded by Ms. Knowles. All in favor. Motion carried. Stucco existing block and paint entire exterior: Ms. Farrell moved to approve the stucco to match the existing. Seconded by Ms. Valente. All in favor. Motion carried. Install new wall sign on the building: Mr. Robbins stated that they are proposing to add a slight awning with lights up front and have brass letters mounted on a 4x5 piece of plywood. Ms. Farrell moved to approve to be proportionate on the board 42'x4'. Seconded by Ms. Webber. Mr. Rogers in opposition. All others in favor. Motion carried. 6" maximum slope increase next to parapet wall: Mr. Kuhn moved to approve. Seconded by Mr. Rogers. All in favor. Motion carried. Replace broken glass and windows: Mr. Rogers moved to approve the replacement of windows with wood or vinyl clad wood. Seconded by Mr. Kuhn. All in favor. Motion carried. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGF, 3 Replace existing office entrance doors: Mr. Robbins stated that they could replace the doors with a metal 6 panel door or a stained birch door or solid wood painted doors. Ms. Farrell moved to approve the replacement with solid wood painted doors. Seconded by Mr. Rogers. All in favor. Motion carried. Change warehouse doors: Mr. Robbins stated that the front door is steel metal and the back is wood. They are leaving the doors and just adding trim. Ms. Knowles moved on approval. Seconded by Ms. Farrell. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Rogers moved to remove 112 S. Park Avenue from the table. Seconded by Ms. Farrell. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Stephens stated that the width of the building is 22' and the depth is 8'. The height of the awning is up 21 ". The logo is 32. The same size log will go on the sides as well as the front. Ms. Goeb moved to approve. Seconded by Mr. Then. Mr. Kuhn in opposition. All others in favor. Motion carried. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Residential: 317 Palmetto Avenue - convert house to a two -car garage. Mr. Kuhn abstained due to personal involvement. Linda Kuhn, 313 Palmetto Avenue was present. She stated that this is not a house; it was not built as a residence and has never been used as a residence. This particular site is zoned special commercial. She stated that basically she is asking for conceptual approval. She and her husband purchased this property several years ago with the intent on using it as his business. They have completed restoration of their home and are completing restoration of a cottage that is in back of their home. This building is their final project. When they first purchased the property they thought that perhaps it could be used as an antique store or something of that sort, but have discovered that since their home is so small, they have no storage and no place to park her vehicle. She does not like leaving her vehicle out on the street. If she parks it at Diamond Glass it becomes a problem and if she parks it on the other side she can't see it and she doesn't feel comfortable not being able to see her vehicle. Ms. Kuhn stated that they would like to diminish the size of this building so that they can use it as a garage. They would like to reduce the size of the roof and shrink the building itself. The drawings are conceptual. She does not plan on putting and entrance door or either side, this is inviting problems. The garage doors will be recessed 2' into the building. They will not be flush with the side of the building. Everything will be constructed of wood. They will comply with Schedule S in every way. The proposed roof will be tin and will match the new roof that is proposed for their home. She asked if the Board will allow them to do this with this building. Ms. Goeb asked if they would be entering from the parking area. Ms. Kuhn stated yes. The site plan shows coming off of the parking area. Ms. Webber asked if the existing curb cut or drive way will be sufficient. Ms. Kuhn stated yes, there will be no changes made to this. It was suggested that they go MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGF, 4 straight into the building and use it for a garage. She does not want to put another curb cut on this block, there are three now. Ms. Webber asked if a lot of the wood would be replaced. Ms. Kuhn stated that they had the building tented a year ago and it has significant termite damage, the joists and rafters are bad, almost all of the wood will be replaced. The parking lot area will not be changed. Ms. Kuhn stated that the building sits right on the sidewalk. She wants to come back 8' to where the building starts off of the sidewalk. Atone time this portion of the building had jalousie windows and is boarded up now. She will landscape. On the back there is an addition that was placed on it, where the height is lower than the other part of the building, she wants to take this portion off. Mr. Then asked if a precedent had been set somewhere else as far as turning and entire building into a garage. Ms. Goeb stated that some people bought a house on the corner of Elm Street next to their home and turned it into a garage. They didn't change the facade, but actually came in from the back. Mr. Singeisen noted that there are some differences: that one was a non - contributing structure, concrete block, and they have a fence that runs the entire property on the l O' Street side and around the back. He stated that this request is a contributing structure and the parking aspect would be viewable from both Palmetto and 4 th Street. Ms. Kuhn stated that it would be viewable from 4 th and no, not if someone is looking straight onto the building from Palmetto, but if you're looking around the corner, yes. Mr. Singeisen stated that everything in Schedule S says no. Schedule S says the parking should be restricted to the back of properties, and Schedule S says there should not be entrances on the sides of properties, which, and this is a personal opinion of Mr. Singeisen, suburbanizes the historic district when you start to see garages in front of homes, like you would in a new development, and then on top of that, it is a contributing structure. Mr. Singeisen stated that it is his knowledge that the property was originally a grocery store. Ms. Kuhn stated Yes, Palmetto Grocery Store, actually originally Ivey's Grocery. Mr. Singeisen stated that with this being one of the oldest areas of town, which includes the little blue house that this Board has gone around and around on. He stated that with this said, he has a very hard time trying to justify it. Ms. Kuhn stated that she understands and felt that she would meet this opposition, but her argument is that as Mr. Singeisen referred to the little blue house, that little blue house has been sitting there for how long now, nothing has actually been done with it, it is being allowed to deteriorate at a rapid rate. She stated that there are no other alternatives, it has become somewhat of an eyesore. This is how she looks at this structure even though they do own it and they knew that it is a contributing structure. She thinks their past renovations speak for themselves. They are trying to improve the property. They purchased the whole block and have improved everything on the block except for this building. She stated that she doesn't think they could resign themselves to putting as much money into this building as it requires unless they could have a viable use, and the only viable use or the alternative that they could come up with is to convert it into a garage. Ms. Webber stated that Ms. Kuhn had said everything she was going to say. When you look at the condition of the building now and its aesthetics and appearance and everything, it is an eyesore. When you look at everything they have done on their block with all of their buildings, they have done a fabulous job of restoring and bringing things back the way they should be and making this building functional at the same time. If they are not allowed to do this, this building will remain an eyesore. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGE 5 Ms. Farrell stated that she believes that people should be able to use their property that functions and she agrees with Claudia that the Kuhn's have done an incredible job with that whole corner. Her hype with it, are the garage doors. The gentlemen that followed before put some decoration on it. There are all kinds of garage doors, either double or accordion size. If something more historic looking of wood could be obtained, would this make it any more palatable. Ms. Goeb stated that they do make overhead hung doors that look like carriage house doors. Mr. Singeisen stated that he just can't agree with something that changes a contributing structure into a garage that fronts on a street, that we have no defensible position for. Another resident, in any part of the Historic District, that buys a neighboring property, can come to the Board and say I am also going to use this as a garage, you've done it before, why can't L Mr. Singeisen stated that he hasn't heard a convincing enough argument for changing the structure considerably. Garage doors are being added that everyone will see every time they drive up Palmetto to go downtown. Ms. Webber stated that, setting the garage doors aside, that's a given if they are allowed to do this with the structure, there are other alternatives to changing the appearance of the structure such as instead of removing that whole 8' front section, opening this up and making it look like a porch to match the house instead of removing the roof extension, rebuild it and make it match the house. Ms. Goeb stated that the National Preservation does recognize properties that has a substantial amount of the original materials that are used to make it more usable for today's society, it called sympathetic improvements, and they give awards for this annually. There are alternatives to properties that are blighted, that cannot be converted into living spaces and that sort of thing, but are still valuable. Ms. Webber asked what the alternatives plans would be if this garage use with the doors did not go through. Ms. Kuhn stated that their house is very small, they have limited storage. Mr. Kuhn's company had originally used that building as a warehouse for storage. One whole side of it is open and the other side has two apartments, and the back has more storage. Since Mr. Kuhn built the addition onto Diamond Glass there is no need for him to use it for storage. Mr. Singeisen asked if there was originally a garage on the property. Ms. Kuhn stated no, there was a two story building where the pool now is that had four apartments, there was never a garage. The history on this property is that there were eleven apartments located within this small area. There are no apartments now, but there was at one time a two -story building behind their house along with the cottage, and that two -story building contained apartments, but there never was a garage. The previous owner was into renting apartments. Ms. Webber asked if there was anyway some type of awning could be used over the garage doors so the doors wouldn't be so prominent and attention would be drawn more towards the awning than the garage doors. Ms. Kuhn stated that they would be willing to do almost anything within reason to help improve the appearance of it. Ms. Webber moved to approve the concept as presented. Motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Webber moved to approve the concept, not as presented, but with either a real front porch or a functional front porch, and roof lines to match their house to the north with more research done on garage doors in keeping with the historic character of the house. Seconded by Ms. Farrell. Ms. Valente stated that we should MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGE 6 be trying to take the best element of the original building and not try to create something that was never there, maintain the nicest of the existing element to the street. We should not create anything fake. Try to screen it with landscaping or a fence. Ms. Goeb explained that the garage doors could be done so that you wouldn't know there were garage doors there until they opened. If something could be done that totally did not look like garage doors, just look like the side of the house. Mr. Singeisen stated that nothing will help the suburbanization of a historic building that is a contributing structure that was built in 1923 as a grocery store. We are going against three separate Schedule S recommendations to allow for a convenience of parking. It boggles his mind that this is even being considered. Mr. Then stated that he couldn't take anything away from the Kuhn's in what they have done on this block, but he can't see going against this many rules that this Board is supposed to be governed by. Ms. Webber stated that the issue is what the building looks like on the outside, not what they chose to put inside, whether it's a car or storage. She thinks it would be worth looking into to make the garage doors that would conform to the rest of the siding on the structure. She asked Ms. Kuhn if she would be willing to check on this and come back before the Board. Ms. Kuhn stated yes. Ms. Webber withdrew her motion and Ms. Farrell withdrew her second. Ms. Webber moved to table until further research on the garage doors to match the existing siding and come back next month. Mr. Then seconded. Ms. Kuhn clarified that what the Board was asking her to do was to do some research on making garage doors to go on the side that would view the appearance that it's not a garage that matches the rest of the structure. Mr. Singeisen stated that it did not help him in his opinion. In favor of the motion were Ms. Webber, Ms. Goeb, Mr. Then and Ms. Valente. In opposition were Mr. Rogers, Mr. Singeisen, Ms. Farrell, and Ms. Knowles. Motion failed. Ms. Kuhn stated that the building is in a state of disrepair. She requested that Board Members look at the building and give her suggestions as to what it thinks they might be able to use it as. She stated that it is an eyesore and the structure will be very costly to repair. She will not open another business on the other side of her home. She doubts that any business would be viable in that location. She just wants it to look nice. Ms. Goeb moved to deny. Seconded by Mr. Rogers. In favor of the motion were Mr. Then, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Singeisen, Ms. Goeb, Ms. Knowles, Ms. Farrell and Ms. Valente. In opposition was Ms. Webber. Motion carried. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Residential: 1004 Palmetto Avenue - Install two columns at front of house. Mr. Rogers moved to table due to lack of representation. Seconded by Ms. Goeb. All in favor. Motion carried. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness - Residential: 1307 Park Avenue (Rose Cottage Tea Room) (Tabled 7- 13 -00) Build 800 sq. ft. addition. Sica Nacu, 1305 Park Avenue, stated that she would like to build an 800 square foot addition to the building facing the parking lot. The addition will be of stucco with a wood frame and wood, double hung windows. All materials will match as close to the existing as possible. On the proposed building, downstairs, will have two rooms with two private bathrooms, with a dining room/lobby kind of a thing. The apartment upstairs will stay MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 PAGF, R an apartment, the apartment above the Tea Room will stay as it is. The main house will stay the same and she is keeping the gift shop. All doors will be french doors, the same as the existing gift shop door. Ms. Farrell moved to approve as submitted with all Schedule S materials being used, doors to be french to match the existing. Seconded by Ms. Webber. All in favor. Motion carried. Discussion regarding meeting with City Commission regarding Code Enforcement (Charles Rowe). Ms. Gerli stated that she had talked to Mr. Rowe this afternoon and he was unable to attend. He did provide his last 3 or 4 months of Code Enforcement logs. Information Items - Minor Reviews: 1s Street Gateway Signage: Ms. Gerli explained that this was something that had come up at the City Commission meeting. One of the Commissioners had gone to Kissimmee and seen the large Kissimmee entranceway and had expressed a desire to have Sanford, at the corner or near French and 1st Street, have a sort of gateway. There is also an intention to have mast arms at the corner that would show the Historic District to the east, when the new mast arms for the traffic lights are installed. Other City Commissioners have expressed a desire to have different ones up and down 17 -92 that would show different districts. Downtown Redevelopment Plan Draft: Ms. Gerli explained that the Plan is completed and the marketing piece is going to be printed in a couple of weeks. We are planning on putting this on a web site to market the Downtown Development Plan and sites that are available for redevelopment. Ms. Farrell stated that she is concerned about the Velma Mitchell School within the Historic District as to its use and what will happen to it. We had talked about making this building and the Armory, the New Tribes Mission, designated land marks. Ms. Farrell moved on the approval of moving forward on the land mark designation list to include: Southside School, The Armory, New Tribes Mission, Westside School, Hopper, the Ball Park, the brick building and Gazebo at the Cemetery with the list being added to as necessary. Seconded by Mr. Kuhn. All in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Singeisen stated that he has been tempted to write a letter copying all of the Historic Preservation Board Members, addressed to the Mayor, City Manager and City Commissioners. Unfortunately, and repeatedly, the Historic Preservation Board's diligent decision making process is disregarded as hockey and stepped over. He is going to request a workshop meeting with the City Commission, Mayor, City Manager and as many of the Board Members who can attend, to sit down as a group of residents who volunteer once a month to preserve the aesthetics of the Historic District. When we as volunteers decided to share our education and opinions and expertise, unfortunately it is too commonly overlooked. This has to stop because ultimately it will be the doom of the District. At the prior City Commission meeting, they were listening to an appeal of a Historic Preservation Board's decision and whether they approved or not is beside the point, whether the applicant is a friend or not is beside the point, the point is that disregard for our way of arriving at a decision was not shown, and simply based on personal impression of whether or not somebody liked somebody. He stated that when the meeting with the City Commission, Mayor, and City Manager can be established, he would appreciate everyone's attendance, if possible. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:45 P.M.