Minutes from the April 22, 2019 meeting

Certificate of Appropriateness 19-28 - Grain Silo - 130 N. 2nd Street

Ms. Lewicka gave an overview of the application and answered questions from the Board regarding the firelane, handicap ramp, artwork and design for the silo and possible future silo removal.  Ms. Lewicka confirmed that the agreement with the city states that if they leave the site they need to restore the site to its previous condition. 

Mark Holt, Sailfish Brewing Company, said they are hoping to get the silo approved, so they can continue growing their business in downtown.  Mr. Holt said the silo will be bolted down and should not be difficult to remove.  Mr. Holt answered questions from the Board on filling the silo, artwork expense, delivery truck size and delivery timeline.

Randy Chapman, resident, said the artwork on the silo will be an improvement to the area.

Jim Norcia, resident, expressed concerns with bringing attention to the silo, and he said he would like to have a mural painted on the side of the building.

Board discussion ensued on the silo mural.

Mr. Sweeney suggested the motion include a time frame, for submission of the proposed artwork, subsequent to the certificate of completion of the silo.

Motion was made by Michael Broderick and seconded by Jon Neprud to approve Certificate of Appropriateness 19-28 with the following conditions:

1. The Sailfish logo will be incorporated into the silo itself.
2. A mural acceptable to the Historic Preservation Board be painted on the rear of the building within 120 days of approval by the Historic Preservation Board and that the mural be brought back to the Historic Preservation Board within 60 days.
3. The existing Sailfish logo painted on the rear of the building would be covered up or removed at the time of the installation of the silo.
4. The building department final inspection takes place after all the above conditions have been met.

AYE:  Jon Neprud, Michael Broderick, Holly Theuns, Charlie Hayek, George Johansen, Vice-Chair Boardman

After item 6c, Mr. Sweeney stated he wanted to discuss an issue that came up regarding signage on the silo. Having looked back at Section 15 of the Code of Ordinances regarding signs, Mr. Sweeney stated it is important that we re-open the public hearing and address it because it potentially implicates a section that this Board doesn't have authority, necessarily to address, because it is a different section, and the sign code is contingent on what the zoning is. Mr. Sweeney explained the situation to the Board that a 32 foot grain silo is not much difference then the base for a lot of the billboards along US Highway 1 and the Board just approved a logo on the silo, which is a giant sign. 

Chairwoman Boardman re-opened the public hearing.

Ms. Guerra stated that Chapter 23 has the ability to grant Variances to the zoning code.  Ms. Guerra explained that within Chapter 15, the sign code designates different types of signage attributed to zoning districts and if the sign code is attributed to the type of zoning, that in of itself can be designated as part of the zoning code. Ms Guerra said an argument can be made that the Board has the ability to grant a Variance to that particular section of Chapter 15-7, having to do with the C-4 zoning district, which allows for a maximum height of 10 feet for any sign based on linear feet on a main street. 

Mr. Sweeney stated in order to amend the original motion, a motion and a second for reconsideration would be required and if that passed then the motion would be reconsidered and subject to an amendment to the motion.

Motion was made by Michael Broderick, and seconded by Holly Theuns to reconsider Certificate of Appropriateness 19-28.

AYE: Jon Neprud, Michael Broderick, Holly Theuns, Charlie Hayek, George Johansen, Vice-Chair Suzanne Boardman
Passed

Mr. Hayek asked if anything is allowed on the silo, including a mural.

Ms. Guerra said as long as it does not advertise the business or could be construed as a sign.  Ms. Guerra explained that the Historic Preservation Board has the ability to grant a Variance and add that as part of the motion. Ms. Guerra said a motion could be made to approve, subject to the condition that staff has presented, or subject to a Variance in order to allow for a 32 foot sign in lieu of a maximum 10 foot sign.

Mr. Sweeney explained to the Board that they can either go away from the signage argument and go towards a mural or move to have a Variance as part of the conditions, referencing a Variance from Section 15-7, as part of the zoning code and then allow 32 feet instead of 10 feet. 

Mr. Broderick said the original motion contained a provision that they had to present the signage package to the Historic Preservation Board within 60 days.  Mr. Broderick asked if the Board could theoretically grant the Variance at that point.

Mr. Sweeney stated from a legal perspective you cannot have a forgone conclusion on the Variance so it would need to be part of the current motion. 

Board discussion ensued.

Ms. Guerra said if you grant the Variance for the height, it does not preclude you from bringing back the logo or artwork.  Ms. Guerra stated the Board is voting to approve the silo and possibly a height Variance.

The Board discussed setting a precedent with such a large sign.

Mr. Sweeney explained the reason he brought up the matter is that essentially the Board would have been setting a precedent without realizing they were setting a precedent. 

Mr. Sweeney suggested the Board embody the original motion, with the friendly amendment of the Variance, pursuant to Boards powers to amend section 15-7.

Ms. Lewicka stated that Variances need to be advertised in the paper and notification needs to go out to everyone located within 500 feet.

Ms. Guerra asked the Board to table the motion until the next Historic Preservation Board meeting to research the matter and to have the applicant act in a legal lawful matter.  Ms. Guerra said a special meeting could be expedited. Mr. Sweeney encouraged the Board in this decision. 
 

Certificate of Appropriateness 19-31 -  New Roof, Door and Windows, Carport Enclosure - 1124 Warrick Drive

Ms. Lewicka gave an overview of the application.

Gary Gamble, applicant representative, said the owner is looking to upgrade the home to make it livable.

Brenda Johnson, Owner, stated she was raised in the house and her family let it go down. Ms. Johnson wants to live in the home and make it into an art studio.

Certificate of Appropriateness 19-34 - New Awning - 100 S. 2nd Street

Ms. Lewicka stated an application for the awning was approved by the Board last month with the condition that the awning will be cantilevered and will be elevated 9 feet from the sidewalk.  Ms. Lewicka explained that the applicant brought a new application, which includes alterations to the previous proposal, which will extend 8 feet from the wall and be supported by draped poles.

Mr. Broderick disclosed that he met with the applicant on site to review the installation.  Mr. Hayek disclosed that he met with the owner, Mr. Gutierrez, to discuss the project.

Mr. Neprud suggested using a retractable awning.

Mike Adams, representative, stated the awning will be dressed up with curtains, extends beyond the walkway of the sidewalk and falls in line with the cabbage tree planters so it will not impede people walking on the sidewalk.

Gus Gutierrez, applicant, stated the drapes will be in line with the existing palm trees that will anchor the 4 columns.

Mr. Hayek said he believes the drapes add to the panache of the restaurant and it gives it a much grander entrance.

Mr. Broderick said the new installation is a little more upscale and it would tie in well with the Sunrise Theater.

Mr. Neprud was concerned that he was told there were no other options for the original awning, and he found an option in 5 minutes on the Internet. 

Ms. Theuns expressed her concern that the poles are obstructive, and approving this application will be setting a precedent for other poles in the sidewalk downtown.

Administratively Approved Certificates of Appropriateness - April 2019