Loading...
03.02.95A G E N D A HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting March 2, 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. Excused /Unexcused Absences III. Welcome New Member IV. Approval of Minutes February 2, 1995 V. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness COMMERCIAL a) 115 East First Street - Metal Storage Facility (Previously Tabled) b) 110 South Palmetto Avenue - Windows (Previously Tabled) RESIDENTIAL a) 1104 South Magnolia Avenue - Re- locate fence, Open Front of House, Driveway (Previously Tabled Driveway) b) 1019 Magnolia Avenue - Driveway (Previously Tabled) VI. Discussion Regarding a Historic Guideline Handout VII. Discussion Regarding a Future Historic Preservation Officer VIII. Turn in Changes to Old Sanford Historic Area Regulations IX. Turn in Changes to Historic Downtown Walking Tour Brochure 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 March 2, 1995 4:30 P.M. City Commission Conference Room City Hall, Sanford, Florida Members Present: Kevin Stubbs, Chairman Margaret Frison Jerry Mills Don Moore Michael Skat Laura Sollien Laura Straehla Members Absent: Cal Conklin Chris Cranias Helen Stairs 011ie Williams , Others in Attendance: Russ Gibson, City Liaison Penny Turner, Secretary The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Kevin Stubbs, at 4:40 P.M. The Board recognized the absences of Cal Conklin, 011ie Williams, and Helen Stairs as excused. The Board welcomed Don Moore, as a new member. Mr. Moore was appointed by the City Commission to replace Monte Olinger's unexpired term ending October 28, 1997. Discussion was held regarding the February 2, 1995, Minutes. Mr. Mills requested that the minutes clarify that he volunteered to visit the site at 110 South Palmetto. Avenue to determine if the existing wood windows could be repaired. - .At the February meeting Mr. Mills provided Mr. Douglas King, with Charmatt, Inc., his business card and requested that he contact him to schedule an appointment to visit the site. Mr. Mills did not receive a call to schedule that appointment. Jerry Mills moved to approve the Minutes of February 2, 1995 with the above mentioned clarification. Seconded by Laura Straehla and carried by unanimous vote. Mr. Gibson gave an update on the FINA Station's appeal to the City Commission. The City Commission upheld the Board's denial for the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a chain link fence at 217' Park Avenue. During that meeting the City Commission indicated that various Boards need to scrutinize their Minutes to make sure they reflect an accurate account of the Board's action. If an applicant presents to the Board information HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes - -- - -- - -- -- - Page 2 March 2, 1995 that is not part of the application, the applicant must be requested to submit the additional information to the Board for the record. Mr. Moore stated that he had attended the meeting and he felt the problem was a slight discrepancy regarding the verbiage "strongly discouraged" and "prohibit ". _The Design Guidelines for new construction states that chain link fences are .strongly discouraged rather than prohibited. Mr. Moore suggested that when an application is denied or approved the minutes need to reflect this based on the codes, facts and findings as presented. Mr:. Gibson informed the Board that the issue regarding the removal of the chain link fence has been turned over to the Code Enforcement Department. The Code Enforcement Department has given the applicant 10 business days to bring the violation into compliance. The Board asked for an update regarding the signage issue at 217 South Park Avenue. Mr. Gibson explained that the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness for signage at 217 South Park Avenue was tabled at the January 5, 1995 meeting. The representatives for the FINA Station had indicated to staff that it was first priority to address the chain link fence issue. The signage violation will need to be forwarded to the Code Enforcement Department. Mr. Gibson apprised the Board of other regulations which had been violated. The business was operating without a Certificate of Occupancy and /or Occupational License. Billy Painter was present and resubmitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a metal storage facility in the rear of the building at 115 East First Street. This application was tabled at the February 2, 1995 meeting with the request that the applicant attend the next meeting and submit photographs of the proposed structure. Mr. Painter informed the Board he had other plans but the Board informed him he will be required to submit additional Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness for any exterior changes to the building. Discussion was held regarding the location of the metal structure. It sits in an alcove. It was expressed that this type of element is very utilitarian and not common in the historic district. Kevin Stubbs moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness based on his feelings that it is not detrimental to the district due to its location. Seconded by Don Moore and motion was carried as follows: Kevin Stubbs Aye Michael Skat Aye Margaret Frison Aye Laura Sollien Aye Jerry Mills Nay Laura Straehla Aye Don Moore Aye HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 3 March 2, 1995 Mr. Mills explained his reason for denial was based on visuals alone. He stated that even as unobtrusive as it is, the structure is not appropriate for the Downtown Commercial Historic District. An addition to the building would be more, in keeping with the district. Mr. Mills offered his assistance to Mr. Painter if he was interested in doing an addition in the rear of the building. Mr. Lenford Wallace, and Mr. Charles H. Charmatt, supplier and installer, were present and resubmitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace wood windows with aluminum windows at 110 South Palmetto. This application was tabled at the February 2, 1995 meeting. It was requested that the applicant provide proper photographs and documentation of non - repair of existing windows. Mr. Mills had volunteered at the February meeting to visit the site to determine if the windows could be repaired, but was not contacted to schedule a meeting time. Mr. Charmett explained that he had spoken with Mr. Wallace and they have determined that to replace the existing wood windows with wood windows is cost prohibited. He further explained that Mr. Wallace is unable to utilize that part of the building because he loses most of his air conditioning. Mr. Mills asked that the photographs of the existing windows and proposed windows be submitted for the record. Mr. Charmett stated that they were not available. Mr. Stubbs stated that he had looked at the windows from ground level and could not see any visible damage that indicates they are beyond repair. The applicant was informed that there has not been adequate proof submitted to this Board to prove the claim that the original windows are destroyed beyond repair. Discussion was held regarding the cost of repairing the existing windows with wood. Mr. Charmett explained in comparison to an aluminum window it would be about 40% more to -do in wood. He stated his cost of the aluminum windows is $360 to $400 per window and it would cost $500 per wood window. Mr. Mills disagreed that the wood windows would cost that much. He stated that Mr. Wallace may be able to save money by repairing the existing windows. He again agreed to meet with Mr. Wallace and examine the windows and frames. Jerry Mills moved to table the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the wood windows at 110 South Palmetto Avenue, due to lack of the information received, which had been requested at the February 2, .1995 meeting. Seconded by Laura Straehla and under discussion, it was stated that if the windows are in non- repair, Mr. Wallace should receive a price from an aluminum and wood window manufacture. Motion was carried by unanimous vote. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes ____ Page 4 March 2, 1995 Darlene Johnson was present and resubmitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to relocated fence, open front of house and driveway at 1104 South Magnolia Avenue. Ms. Johnson submitted a revised plan. She is proposing to remove the fence between the house and the garage, move the fence along the sidewalk back 3', and remove the front part of the fence that surrounds the porch. She is further proposing to place a gate between the house and the garage to use as a driveway using alley access and to replace the existing 6' chain link fence with a 4' feet chain link fence. This plan will square off one side of the property to allow space for her dogs.. The Board commended Ms. Johnson on her revised plan. It is a great improvement comparatively from the Old Sanford Regulations. Access from the rear alley is exactly what the codes are set up to promote. The existing 6' chain link fence is not a material issue at this time for the Board,, it was approved prior to the regulations. The proposed rework is lessening the impact of a nonhistoric material on the property. It was requested that the fence be painted a historic green. Laura Straehla moved to approve the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to relocated fence and open front of house at 1104 South Magnolia Avenue, as presented on the revised plan, with the chain link fence to be painted historic green. Ms. Straehla stated that the reason for approving the changes is because it is an existing chain link fence that was approved prior to- the administration of the Old Sanford Regulations. The Board is approving the rework of the fence not the material. Seconded by Michael Skat and carried by unanimous vote. Mr. & Mrs. Alex Then were present and resubmitted an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness to install a new driveway approach off 1019 Magnolia Avenue. Mr. Then explained that there is not the ability to bring two cars off the street from the alley, they have tried as the Board suggested since the last meeting and it has been difficult, there is a chance of collision. In addition, they are attempting to get the cars close enough to an entrance into the house for safety reasons and practicality sake. Mr. Stubbs stated that Mr. Conklin had visited the site and he stated in his report that there was insufficient room for a vehicle access to the back of the lot North of the outbuilding. Mr. Stubbs felt after reading Mr. Conklin's report that he was being sensitive to the issue that is proposed but felt he did not address the codes specifically the way they are written. The Old Sanford Regulation as far as site planning and approach of vehicular traffic does not promote curb cuts on primary streets. Mr. Stubbs stated he drove by the property and feels that the property is a good situation because they are right there by the alley: It seems to Mr. Stubbs that as far as their existing driveway that two cars could be pulled side by side, you would not get them both on the concrete but you certainly have ample room for two cars side by side in that location. Pulling one off to the left and the other straight up. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes - -. - -_ Page 5 March 2, 1995 Mr. Then stated the only way you could do that would be again to review the concrete work of the existing driveway. We cannot put two cars side by side without driving over curbs. Mrs. Then stated that there was also a concern of the cars being on the other side of our privacy fence, we cannot really see them and Mr. Then cannot see me when I get home at night to get out and if we go to - the grocery we have to get out, unload the car, go to the fence, go through the fence, shut the fence and put everything up again and then walk another 65' to the side of the house to the closest entrance. The applicants only have the front door and the side entrance to the home. Mr. Stubbs suggested reworking their fence and put in a larger curb cut on the secondary street you can get two cars in there. If you rework the fence and put the gate where you would be getting out of the door of your car directly adjacent to your gate into your rear yard. Mr. Then stated there will still be a 6' to 8' obstacle from the house to where we park our cars and also the fact that is so far from the house. Discussion was held regarding a curb cut on Magnolia Avenue. Mr. Stubbs explained there is designated parking area on site that is the only area on the property site that is allowed for parking it is the rear of the property and access is from the alley per the Old Sanford Regulations. Mr. Moore stated that there are curb cuts all the way down that street in both directions. The previous occupants had pretty deep routs where they are proposing to place a driveway. It was explained that the curb cuts were done prior to the Old Sanford Historic Regulations and the regulations are structured to promote existing planning and character of traditional planning of this neighborhood. Pre - existing conditions we know exist that are in noncompliance with the codes throughout the district. Ms. Straehla stated the Board is trying to discourage people from adding more curb cuts and turning their curb cuts. that were added back to non curb cuts. Front street curb cuts are a product of contemporary planning. The alleys are there because the town was originally planned for access to the rear of the property. Mr. Then stated he understands the necessity to try and maintain the integrity of the Historic District but we are living in the present day and this Board needs to consider what makes it usable and practically for contemporary living as well. Mrs. Then expressed her concern that if they did as the Board is requesting it would eat up a large part of their back yard where there are trees and it is shaded to make it a carport. Making it a less attractive and less useful back yard space. Mr. Stubbs apprised the applicants that there has only been one curb cut approved since he has been on the Board and that was a curb cut on a secondary street and that was because someone had built a house on her original backyard. She was also willing to close off her curb cut on a primary street. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes_ ________ __.__ Page 6 March 2, 1995 Mr. Mills submitted a rough sketch as a solution it calls for putting a driveway in the back yard but eventually there might be a desire to make a connection between the back of the house and your garage /shop area and that still leaves the entire side of your yard open. You would have to move the fence to the front of the area. The second idea represents even moving the fence. farther out which incorporates a whole big side yard that is probably bigger in square footage. Someday you may wish to have children then you have a nice driveway for a child to play in and you have a play grass area in the side yard. Mr. Then stated he certainly appreciates Mr. Mills coming up with that solution but he is not convinced that he wants to turn his entire back yard into a driveway. Mr. Mills stated that if we approved this curb cut it would set a precedent and we could not enforce the codes relating to curb cuts. Mr. Mills stated an alternative is for us to deny this application and you appeal to the City Commission. You have what you feel are good solid justification and perhaps the City Commission would overrule this Boards decision and in that case we have gone by the regulations. Kevin Stubbs moved to deny the Application for Certificate of Appropriateness based on reasons stated. Seconded by Jerry Mills and motion was carried as follows: Kevin Stubbs Aye Michael Skat Aye Margaret Frison Aye Laura Sollien Aye Jerry Mills Aye Laura Straehla Aye Don Moore Nay Mr. Stubbs informed Mr. & Mrs. Then to contact Mrs. Turner for the process of the appeal. Mr. Gibson informed them that they would need to write a letter to the City Commission and the City Clerk stating the reasons for your appeal. Discussion was held regarding preparation of a historic guideline handout. Sample of Stuart's handout was provided to the Board for review. It is a basic handout related to architectural regulations that have been developed in Stuart. The Board concurred that it will be a worth while effort to consider. This is another attempt to make people that are moving into the area and people needing building permits aware of the historic regulations. This will be a product that briefly goes through and explains the process and the finer points of the codes. Jerry Mills moved to nominate Laura Straehla to set up a committee to do a small brochure of information on the Residential Historic District. Discussion will be held May 4, 1995. Motion was seconded and carried by unanimous vote. - HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD - Minutes Page 7 March 2, 1995 Discussion for a further Historic Preservation Officer was held. There is a growing need for a Historic Preservation Officer at the City. A Preservation Officer could promote education, obtain grant monies, prepare submittal for awards, and to assist with the Minor Review for Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness and Code Enforcement. The Board discussed sharing a preservation officer . with another local city. Mr. Stubbs stated he is willing to contact Mr. Simmons to get his ideas on how he would suggest to proceed with this issue. If Mr. Simmons recommends writing a letter to the City Commission he will handle. Members turned in potential code enforcement violations to Mrs. Turner. Members were requested to turn in proposed changes to the Old Sanford Regulations. Members were requested to turn in proposed changes to the Historic Downtown Walking Tour Brochure. Mr. Gibson informed the Board that Gary Winn, City's Building Official, approached him with a complication that has arisen in the historic area. The structure at 714 Oak Avenue is currently non- conforming due to the set backs. The structure is build on the property lines. The Old Sanford Regulations require 4' set back from the property line. The contractor for this property is proposing to rebuild the structure entirely using same materials, size, colors, etc. To rebuild the structure entirely it must comply with Design Guidelines for new construction. To circumvent compiling with these guidelines, the City's Building and Planning staff permitted the contractor to go forth building the structure in two phases. After discussion, the Board concurred that rebuilding the structure requires approval of an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness through this Board. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully, Penny L. Turner