Loading...
04.06.95A G E N D A HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting April 6, 1995 City Hall City Commission Conference Room 300 N. Park Avenue Sanford, Florida 4:30 P.M. I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Acknowledgement of Kevin Stubb's Resignation III. Acknowledgement of Laura Sollien as Chairperson (For Kevin Stubb's Unexpired Term) IV. Election of Vice - Chairman V. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness RESIDENTIAL a) 613 Magnolia Avenue - Re -Roof b) 705 Magnolia Avenue - Fence c) 718 Magnolia Avenue - Windows d) 806 South Magnolia Avenue - Front Door e) 613 South Myrtle Avenue - Fence f) 1204 Oak Avenue - Fence g) 600 Park Avenue - Fence h) 500 South Oak Avenue - Presentation of Proposed Changes /Exterior Modifications (Joseph Ingria, Jr.) COMMERCIAL a) 217 South Park - Graphics and Signs VI. Acknowledgement of Minor Review Committee Actions: Residential a) 811 Elm Avenue - Paint Exterior & Repair Roof b) 800 Magnolia Avenue - Paint Exterior c) 312 South Oak Avenue - Paint Exterior d) 316 South Oak Avenue - Paint Exterior e) 119 West 5th Street - Lamp Posts VII. Review Request by Seminole County Historical Committee for Permission to Erect a Railroad Historical Marker at the intersection of First and Oak Avenue VIII. Review Draft Revisions of Schedule S, Historic Preservation of the Land Development Regulations (Outdoor Display Provisions) IX. Discuss Changes to Historic Downtown Walking Tour Brochure and Authorization for Purchase of Brochures X. Other Business a) Code Enforcement - All members are encouraged to turn in potential code violations in writing to Penny Turner at the close of the meeting. 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 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 330 -5626 48 hours in advance of the meeting. M I N U T E S HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING April 6, 1995 4:30 P.M. City Commission Conference Room City Hall; Sanford, Florida Members Present: Kevin Stubbs, Chairman Cal Conklin Chris Cranias Margaret Frison Jerry Mills Michael Skat Laura Sollien Laura Straehla 011ie Williams Members Absent: Helen Stairs Don Moore Others in Attendance: Russ Gibson, City Liaison Penny Turner, Secretary The meeting was called-to order by the Vice Chairman, Laura Sollien at 4:31 P.M. The Chairman was delayed. The Board acknowledged with regret Kevin Stubb's last day as a Board member. His resignation will be effective after today's meeting. The Board further acknowledged Laura Sollien as Chairperson to complete Kevin Stubb's unexpired term. Chris Cranias nominated Michael Skat as Vice - Chairman. Seconded by Laura Sollien and carried by unanimous vote. Michael Skat will complete Laura Sollien's unexpired term as Vice - Chairman. Dennis Ingram was present and submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to remove asphalt shingles and replace with a reproduction tile roof at 613 Magnolia Avenue. The applicant presented a sample of the proposed type of tin. Jerry Mills moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to re -roof the structure at 613 Magnolia Avenue as presented. Seconded by Laura Straehla and carried by unanimous vote. David Sumner submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace rotten wood fence and add 70 feet on driveway side of the property, with same type and style shadow fence at 705 Magnolia Avenue. The proposed fence will be 6 feet, same as existing fence. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 2 April 6, 1995 Cal Conklin moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace rotten wood fence and add 70 feet on the driveway side of the property at 705 Magnolia Avenue. Seconded by Jerry Mills and carried by unanimous vote. Michael Fout submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of five (5) windows at 718 Magnolia Avenue. The windows will either be high -end Pella or Anderson. The Board questioned which five (5) windows are to be replaced at the property at 718 Magnolia Avenue. Jerry Mills moved to table the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness based on it is unclear which five (5) windows are to be replaced. Seconded by Michael Skats and carried by unanimous vote. Raymond and Mary Larsen submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace original front door with a solid oak door, with an oval beveled glass window, at 806 Magnolia Avenue. Applicant claims that the original door has been outfitted with numerous locks during the years and the area of the door surrounding the lock sets is quite shaky. Applicant indicated that - the door will be saved and incorporated into another area of the house. Cal Conklin moved to- table the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the original front door of the home at 806 Magnolia Avenue. The applicant needs to provide additional information such as a photograph of the existing and proposed doors. It was also requested that the applicant provide information regarding whether or not the existing door is in non - repair. Seconded by Jerry Mills and carried by unanimous vote. Patricia Hart submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a 39" -,40 white wood picket fence at 613 South Myrtle Avenue. Laura Straehla moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a 39" - 40" white wood picket fence at 613 South Myrtle Avenue, as submitted. The applicant must abide by the section in Schedule S of the Land Development Regulations pertaining to fences. Seconded by Chris Cranias and carried by unanimous vote. Cheryl Gunderman submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect an 8 feet privacy stockade fence and picket fence at 1240 Oak Avenue. Discussion was held regarding the proposed height of the privacy fence. The Board indicated that they have been consistent with allowing a fence to be six feet high. The only time an 8 feet fence has been approved is when it backed a Commercial Property. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 2 April 6, 1995 Cal Conklin moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace rotten wood fence and add 70 feet on the driveway side of the property at 705 Magnolia Avenue. Seconded by Jerry Mills and carried by unanimous vote. Michael Fout submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of five (5) windows at 718 Magnolia Avenue. The windows will either be high -end Pella or Anderson. The Board questioned which five (5) windows are to be replaced at the property at 718 Magnolia Avenue. Jerry Mills moved to table the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness based on it is unclear which five (5) windows are to be replaced. Seconded by Michael Skats and carried by unanimous vote. Raymond and Mary Larsen submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace original front door with a solid oak door, with an oval beveled glass window, at 806 Magnolia Avenue. Applicant claims that the original door has been outfitted with numerous locks during the years and the area of the door surrounding the lock sets is quite shaky. Applicant indicated that the door will be saved and incorporated into another area of the house. Cal Conklin moved to table the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the original front door of the home at 806 Magnolia Avenue. The applicant needs to provide additional information such as a photograph of the existing and proposed doors. It was also requested that the applicant provide information regarding whether or not the existing door is in non - repair. Seconded by Jerry Mills and carried by unanimous vote. Patricia Hart submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a 39" - 40" white wood picket fence at 613 South Myrtle Avenue. Laura Straehla moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a 39" - 40" white wood picket fence at 613 South Myrtle Avenue, as submitted. The applicant must abide by the section in Schedule S of the Land Development Regulations pertaining to fences. Seconded by Chris Cranias and carried by unanimous vote. Cheryl Gunderman submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect an 8 feet privacy stockade fence and picket fence at 1240 oak Avenue. Discussion was held regarding the proposed height of the privacy fence. The Board indicated that they have been consistent with allowing a fence to be six feet high. The only time an 8 feet fence has been approved is when it backed a Commercial Property. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes_ Page 3 April 6, 1995 Michael Skat moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a privacy stockade and picket fence at 1240'oak Avenue. The privacy stockade fence can only be six feet in height. Seconded by 011ie Williams and carried by unanimous vote. M.J. Hunter submitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing wood privacy fence with same material at 600 Park Avenue (107 W. 6th Street for emergencies). Discussion was held regarding this property being a corner lot and having double frontage. Jerry Mills moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing wood privacy fence with same material at 600 Park Avenue. Mr. Mills based his approval on the fact that it is a unique structure set in unusual circumstances. This will enable some secure yard. The fence is to be painted the same color. Motion was seconded by Chris Cranias and carried as follows: Kevin Stubbs Nay Michael Skat Nay Cal Conklin Aye Laura Sollien Aye Chris Cranias Aye Laura Straehla Nay Margaret Frison Aye 011ie Williams Aye Jerry Mills Aye Presentation was given by Mr. Joseph Ingria, Jr., of the proposed changes /exterior modifications at 500 South Oak Avenue. The Board suggested Mr. Ingria contact Tallahassee to determine if he was eligible for Investment Tax Credits. Martin Rak, applicant, and Alex Ford, applicant's attorney, were present to address the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to install building and gas island canopy graphics and to install FINA price sign and FINA I.D. sign on existing sign pole at 217 South Park Avenue. The application indicates that the pole height has been cut from 14' to 10' to allow sign to be same overall height as previous sign 20 and to allow minimum 7' site clearance on corner as required by D.O.T. The Board submitted for the record the Historic Preservation Board Minutes from August. 4, 1994 and December 1, 1994. It was asked did FINA have any regulations regarding the height of the letters and the size of the logo. It was further asked if FINA could provide any other options. Mr. Ford stated that the graphics are provided by FINA but he was unaware if there were thinner graphics. He thought there are certain requirements based on the size of the building. These requirements were not submitted to the Board for review. Ms. Sollien asked did the facia size change when the work was done in August. Mr. Ford submitted for the record a photograph of the building in July of 1994, prior to any work being done. You are able to see the facia in that photograph and can see there is less space now. He further submitted letter dated January 9, 1995 to Steve Deluca from the District Coordinator, Tony Njirich. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 4 April 6, 1995 Mr. Mills informed Mr. Ford that the graphics, as installed, have never been submitted to this Board. Mr. Rak has not met with Mr. Gibson and Mr. Stubbs to discuss possibly researching with FINA's District Coordinator to determine their required standards. Mr. Mills stated he felt it a little unfair to Mr. Ford and the Board having a discussion of what can and cannot be done without someone having the opportunity to talk to Fina to determine their standards in a Historic District. He further expressed that it really surprises him that areas such as the French Quarter's in New Orleans, Savanna, and Charleston have not had stricter standards. Mr. Ford stated he thought it was an excellent idea to meet and go over the standards. Jerry Mills moved to table on Item 1 of the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to install graphics on the building and the canopy at 217 South Park Avenue. It was stated that what FINA did was not in accordance with the Land Development Regulations. Mr. Rak did not go by the appropriate procedures. The Board welcomes and wants the business in the Downtown District. The Board finds it hard to believe a company as big as Fina has not been in situations like this one before and that it is as cut and dried as you do it our way or you pay us $30,500. There has to be some kind of in between and the Board feels the opportunity to review FINA's standards. Mr. Ford stated that he thinks that they have really good bases in saying that they really do not have to be here at all. He prefers not getting into that right now because the Board is working with them and he would just as soon keep that on that tone right now but he believes there is that argument. Mr. Ford was informed that it has been the tone the Board had at the other two meetings. Mr. Cranias gave a good example of working together and that is the McDonald's. McDonald's is not in the Historic District and they are not required to adhere to this Board's regulation this Board merely sent them a letter asking them to comply with color scheme and keep historic nature in mind and they did an A plus job. Mr. Ford stated that he understands that a lot of companies will take that position, but FINA doesn't care to do that. Jerry Mills moved to table Item 1 of the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to install graphics on the building and canopy at 217 Park Avenue. Seconded by Laura Straehla and carried by unanimous vote. Item 2 of the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness for the building at 217 Park Avenue deals with the issue of the FINA Price Sign and I.D. Sign. Mr. Ford referred to the July 1994 photograph which shows the then existing pole sign. He stated that HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 5 April 6, 1995 you can see by the photograph that there are actually three separate areas for signage, two up at the top which is rather difficult to see. The total amount of signage in this particular sign is less space then the prior sign, in addition to that the existing sign they have put in the shrubbery below causes a certain requirement with site distance standards, by raising up that shrubbery you need to raise up that sign a little bit higher. Mr. Rak has spoken with Fred Farrell with DOT and basically the height of the sign is the minimal requirement for DOT standard and it is understood that the City of Sanford may have a separate standard for site distance. Mr. Stubbs apprised Mr. Ford and Mr. Rak that there two sign regulations that apply. Firstly there are the Design Guidelines for the Downtown Commercial District that was done by Yeilding and Provost. These have guidelines for types of signs it also references that Land Development Regulations should be adhered to as closely as possible. There is some verbiage in the Design Guidelines that applies from a historic standpoint and that is that it states that freestanding and roof signs have never been used to a large extent in the district and that is in Site Elements under Signs on page 8. Page 9 references freestanding signs again and states that freestanding signs and roof signs are strongly discouraged. This is similar to the chain link fence issue which are strongly discouraged from a historic standpoint these are historic guidelines for the downtown district. The Land Development Regulations and the- Design Guideline state that it is intended that these guidelines adopt the existing sign regulations of the City where reasonable possible while addressing a specific and special needs of the district, which from this Board's standpoint is a historic concern. The specific sign regulations in the Land Development Regulations Section 5 has some General Design Criterias for signs in this area. It is the Sign Regulations in the Downtown Commercial Historic District which are the ones that apply and they state that signs shall not exceed 30" in height. Directory type signs, only one business identification shall be allowed per sign, now if this is double sided then that may conflict as well. Sign faces shall be either parallel or perpendicular to the face of the building. Mr. Rak stated that Bettie Sonnenburg with Land Development approved the square footage of the sign, the position of the sign and the planters around the sign. Mr. Gibson informed the Board that signage was not addressed on the site plan that was approved. Mr. Stubbs requested that Mr. Rak produce the official submittal. Mr. Ford requested that the Board look at the Standards of General Design Criteria, Section 5, Subsection A, it does not address pole sign. Mr. Ford further requested that the Board keep in mind this is a preexisting pole, which was cut back two feet. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 6 April 6, 1995 Mr. Cranias pointed out that in the August 4, 1994, Minutes Mr. Rak was informed of the sign regulations that strongly discourage free standing roof signs. Mr. Ford informed the Board that just as a matter of law, strongly discouraged does not prohibit and if you are going to strongly discourage you need to set specific standards. Mr. Ford stated that there are no standards for which he could state I am entitled to it or I am not entitled to it. Mr. Skat disagreed with Mr. Ford due to the fact that Mr. Rak knew during the August Meeting that he was suppose to come before this Board again for signage. Mr. Rak agreed that it was discussed at that meeting. Even after having the discussion and knowing signage was an issue with this Board Mr. Rak comes back before the Board after the signs were erected. Mr. Rak stated after he had approval from Bettie Sonnenburg. Mr. Ford stated that he and his client do not agree that they come before this Board. Mr. Skat asked Mr. Ford why he felt his client did not have to come before this Board. Mr. Ford explained that the type of sign is not required to get the Board's approval by Section 5. Mr. Skat informed Mr. Ford that according to the process you go through to get things approved within the Historic District you are required to come before this Board. Mr. Ford disagreed that this type of sign requires ,approval. Mr. Skat explained further that for any improvement you need to come before this Board. Any signage in the historic district is required to come before this Board. Mr. Ford stated the second reason he felt he did not need to come before this Board, under the case of Park and Commerce vs. Delray Beach 63672, page 12, The Florida Supreme Court decision 1994, Mr. Ford states it is illegal for this Board to sit and simply exercise discretion. By Florida Law we are entitled to specific regulations that we can say ok we abide by this standard or no we do not. Mr. Ford stated thi Ordinance is simply unconstitutional. Mr. Skat informed Mr. Ford that an appeal process is available. Mr. Ford stated that is what they are assuming they will due but they did want to come before this Board first to try and work it out. Kevin Stubbs moved to deny the pole sign based on the regulations before him. Denial is based on reasons referenced in both the Design Guidelines for the Downtown Commercial District and the Site Element Signs page 8 and 9, as well as, the General Sign Criteria, Section 5, Subsection C. Michael Skat seconded the motion and under discussion Mr. Ford referred the Board to Section 5(a). he asked what type of sign does a pole sign fall under. He stated his understanding is that it does not fall under any of them. It falls under the freestanding pole sign in the Design Guidelines. Mr. Cranias asked Mr. Ford if the Board was willing to give you suggestions on alternative ways to do this signage are you open to that or are you steadfast that this is the sign. Mr. Ford stated that if the Board has suggestions they have the right to table this item as they did the last. He likes nothing more than to settle cases. He stated that his client Mr. Rak is not the decision maker HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 7 April 6, 1995 here, his boss is. Mr. Skat informed him the height of the sign is a concern. He further stated that he was not opposed to the sign itself, it is more its height. Mr. Skat had driven through Port Orange and noticed a FINA sign that sits 3 1/2 feet off the ground. Mr. Ford explained that the sign his is referring to is not on a corner where there are stop signs. Another issue that needs to be addressed is safety this is a corner lot and a traffic triangle have to be dealt with. When you are at the stop sign you have to have clear sight distance from the left to right. If someone is walking down the street or another car is coming you are able to see them. Mr. Gibson will refer this for review to the City's Engineering Department. Mr. Cranias stated that where the pole sign sits it is far enough back that a lower sign is permissible is this particular situation. Mr. Conklin indicated that he felt the majority of the Board would like to see the sign much lower and not as big. That is effectively what we would like to negotiate towards. Mr. Ford stated he was willing to meet with Mr. Gibson and a Board member and try to work out something. Mr. Mills asked Mr. Conklin being a Civil Engineer having to deal with signage and site lines at stop signs, is there some sort of recommendation that we can give them some sort of a State or Federal Regulation that says that the bottom of the sign needs to be above a certain height. Mr. Conklin stated that if you have a real site situation but this situation you have a stop sign at the corner and it is a four way stop. Mr. Mills asked if when a person comes to a stop that they are actually beyond the site line of the FINA sign and if that FINA sign was a monumental sign on the ground it would not interfere with site line. Mr. Conklin implied that with his general information that the sign appears set back far enough. Mr. Mills explained to the applicant that the Board has been trying to bring contemporary sign in the historic district down to grade. If it is a site line issue then the Board needs to consider the exact height it needs to be. Mr. Stubbs gave justification for his motion to deny. Section 4, Subsection A, of Schedule S, Land Development Regulations states after the designation of a Historic District, which this is a designated historic district locally, no exterior portion of any building or other . structure including walls, fences, light fixtures, steps and pavement or other apparent features, nor above ground utility structure nor any type of outdoor advertising sign shall be erected, altered, restored, moved, or demolished within such district until after an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness as to the proposed changes to exterior features has been submitted to and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. Subsection E of that same Section 4, states for specific historic district development requirements refer to the publication design guidelines for new construction in the downtown commercial historic district of Sanford, Florida by yeilding and Provost Architects and Engineers, August 1990, this is official part of Schedule S and maybe obtained through the City of Sanford Department of Engineering and Planning. Section 5, Sign Regulations, I think do HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 8 April 6, 1995 not list specifically pole signs because when you reference the design guidelines as it states as an official part of this it states freestanding signs and roof signs are strongly discouraged from a historic standpoint and that is what my motion is based on solely. I did not deny based on height. Mr. Ford referred the Board to Section 5 (G ) Alternative signage the Historic Preservation Board shall have the authority to review and approve the proposed signs that do not follow these regulations. The language you refer to says discouraged it did not say outlawed. If you do want to table it we do stand ready to discuss those issue and what I would suggest is I am assuming that the City has an Engineer that has the qualifications to tell us what the minimum standard is as far as height if you do agree to have a pole sign. Laura Sollien called on Mr. Stubbs motion to deny. There was a motion, a second and discussion. Mr. Ford stated that if the Board is not willing to table this item he has further argument. He stated they had confirmed with the formal owner that the property was never given any notification that they were part of the historic district. I did ask the City to provide documentation that they were ever notified, Russ by letter informed me that he was sure that they had known, but he was unable to provide documentation of this. Mr. Ford stated for purpose of preserving the argument we would simple state that this property is not officially part of the Downtown Historic District. He did not want to get into that further he was saving that argument for later. If the Board does not vote to approve Mr. Stubbs motion and request that we do get back together with the City we would be glad to. Ms. Sollien called for any further discussion the vote was as follows, the motion was not upheld: Kevin Stubbs Aye Cal Conklin Nay Chris Cranias Nay Margaret Frison Aye Jerry Mills Nay Michael Skat Aye Laura Sollien Nay Laura Straehla Nay 011ie Williams Aye Cal Conklin moved to table item 2 of the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness relating to the Pole Sign at 217 South Park Avenue. A time needs to be scheduled to a discussion between City Staff, a Historic Preservation Board Representative, and the applicant. This meeting will need to take place prior to the May 4, 1995 meeting. Motion was seconded by Laura Straehla, she requested that the record state under general discussion that she has not seen up until today any determination from the applicant to work with the City. She hopes that this Board leniency shown today will be noticed and appreciated. Mr. Skat volunteered to represent this Board in the negotiation. Mr. Skat stated that he does not have the architectural expertise that Mr. Mills and Mr. Stubbs has his only reason it that he wants to see it resolved. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 9 April 6, 1995 Motion was made by Cal Conklin to table item 2. seconded by Laura Straehla and carried as follow: Kevin Stubbs Nay Cal Conklin Aye Chris Cranias Aye Margaret Frison Aye Jerry Mills Aye Michael Skat Aye Laura Sollien Aye Laura Straehla Aye 011ie Williams Aye Ms. Williams asked about the chain link fence issue at 217 South Park. She was informed that the City Commission upheld our decision and it was appealed in circuit court. Kevin Stubbs moved to approve /acknowledge the Minor Review Committee's action on the following Application for Certificate of Appropriateness: a) 811 Elm Avenue - Paint Exterior & Repair Roof b) 800 Magnolia Avenue - Paint Exterior c) 312 South Oak Avenue - Paint Exterior d) 316 South oak Avenue - Paint Exterior e) 149 West 5th Street - Lamp Posts I i Motion was seconded by 011ie Williams and carried by unanimous vote. Kay Bartholomew, representative of the Seminole County Historical Commission, was present and submitted a request for permission to erect a Railroad Historical Marker. Discussion was held regarding erecting the historical marker at different locations 1) the intersection of First and Oak. 2) in front of the Welaka Building 3) Lake side between the street and the seawall The Board's preference is to have the marker in the Downtown Commercial District.. Recommendation that the primary location is between the lake and the seawall. The secondary location being First and Myrtle. The Board reviewed the draft revisions of Schedule S, Historic Preservation of Land Development Regulations. These revisions were developed by staff in response to potential code violations in the Downtown Commercial district. These regulations provide for limited display of merchandise in front of stores upon public sidewalks. These proposed provisions will be administered by the Historic Preservation Board. Discussion was held regarding Section 5.1 (C) (4) Displays should not exceed six (6) feet in height. Jerry Mills move to approve to proposed revisions of Schedule S, Historic Preservation of the Land Development Regulations, with the change in Section 5.1. (C) (4). Seconded by Kevin Stubbs and carried by unanimous vote. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes April 6, 1995 Page 10 Discussion was held regarding the changes to the Historic Downtown Walking Tour Brochure and Authorization for purchase of the brochures. Jerry Mills moved to approve the changes made to the Historic Downtown Walking Tour Brochure and Authorization for purchase of these brochures. Jerry Mills moved to approve the purchase of the Walking Tour Brochure holders. Seconded by Cal Conklin and carried by unanimous vote. The Board will refuse incomplete Application for Certificate of Appropriateness. The burden of proof is on the applicant There being no further business before the Board the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 P.M. Respectfully Submitted: Penny Turner