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