630. I'm going to call this meeting to order. Roll call please. Mr. Burzynski. What did you say, Mr. Mrozinski? Here.
Mr. Sprecher here. Miss Hallett here. Miss Ryan here. Good evening. Thanks for being here. Are there any public comments
that do not relate to our agenda items? I don't see anybody else here, so probably not. We're going to move on to number four.
The approval of minutes from April 7th, 2025. Motion to approve. Second. Okay. I just
have one comment. I don't remember exactly where it was, but there was a discrepancy. It talked about who was here and it mentioned the attorney, but then
it mentioned a different attorney that gave the report. Okay. So that just needs to be cleaned up. I'll take a look at that. I think it was number five
or something on there. Okay. We have a motion in a second. Will take a vote. Motion by Miss Ryan and a second by Mr. Sprecher.
Yes. Okay. Miss Ryan? Yes, Miss Hallett? Yes, Mr. Sprecher? Yes. Mr. Burzynski. Yes. Okay. Number five, quasi judicial announcement and swearing in of
speakers, please. This is a quasi judicial proceeding where the Heritage Preservation Board acts in a quasi judicial rather than a legislative capacity at a
quasi judicial hearing. It is not the board's function to make law, but rather to apply law that has already been established in a quasi judicial hearing. The board is required
by law to make findings of fact based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, and apply those findings of fact to previously established criteria contained in the Code of
Ordinances, in order to make a legal decision regarding the application before it. The board may only consider evidence at this hearing that the law considers competent, substantial, and relevant to the
issues. If the competent, substantial, and relevant evidence at the hearing demonstrates that the applicant has met the criteria established in the Code of Ordinances, then the board is required by law to
find in favor of the applicant. By the same token, if the competent, substantial and relevant evidence at the hearing demonstrates that the applicant has failed to meet the criteria
established in the Code of Ordinances, then the board is required by law to find against the applicant. Chair. Just want to make sure there's anyone
discloses any ex parte communication. Not that I'm aware of anybody. No. Okay. Swear in the. If you're planning on speaking, please stand and
raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm your testimony will be the truth, so help you? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.
Number six applications. A application 25.29 Certificate of Appropriateness. To replace a
door on a contributing structure at 101 Reed Street. Carolyn.
Evening, Caroline. Lanford, ACP principal planner, planning and zoning department, City of Tarpon Springs. So this application is a 2529 at 101
Reed Street. This slide shows you the local land use, context and location of the subject property. This slide is showing
the property's location within the national and local historic districts. This slide gives you some basic information about the
subject property. It is a Gothic Revival structure, circa 1885. It's two story with a three story tower known as the HDL
Webster House. It also includes a contributing one story, two car, wood frame, stucco clad garage, which is actually the subject of this Certificate of
appropriateness. The applicant is seeking to replace an existing French style door on the garage structure with a 15 light French style fiberglass
impact door. This is the subject property from the Florida master site file. This is the north of elevation of the primary
structure at the site. This is the garage structure that is the subject of this application. Just another view showing you
the garage is located behind a site wall on the east elevation of the property. Some context.
This is that Universalist Church of Tarpon Springs, which is kind of a catty corner from the property. And the primary
structure at this site was constructed for the Reverend, who was a co-founder of that church. Here's just showing some
context of the area. And then the proposed project is showing you which door is being proposed to be replaced. This is the
existing door. And just from looking at it from afar and from this picture, not sure that this is even a historic door.
Certainly not the glass insert is certainly modern. So and then they are proposing to replace it with a similar style door just
it will be constructed of fiberglass with modern glass. So the relevant standards of review
for this application would be two, three, seven, nine and ten. With respect to windows and doors. Obviously, the use of a
15 light French style replacement door is consistent with the original architectural style of the property, although the materials would be
contemporary, which is not ideal, but esthetically the impact would be the board needs to determine if the impact of
the replacement would be significant. The replacement of the door would not significantly alter the esthetics of the historic streetscape, or the
structure's relationship to the street. We're not changing any kind of dimensions or anything like that. So staff finds that it does not really present an
esthetic disruption. With respect to the architectural features. The proposed fiberglass door would have similar visual qualities to a
wood door, which, you know, would be the ideal replacement would be to replace with the historic materials. But because of the similar visual qualities.
This could be considered a suitable replacement. And then the project does not strictly meet the secretary standards
because of the use of contemporary materials. However, the visual impact would be minimal and replacement of the door would contribute to the
longevity of the contributing structure. This project is expected to conform with all of the requirements of the Land Development Code, and is generally consistent with the
historic preservation element of the Comprehensive Plan. And this is just a page from our Design Guidelines Review manual. Stating that, you know,
replacement doors necessary, you want to get as close to the original as possible. And obviously we always want to repair things rather than replace them. But when we
replace them, we just want to make sure that they're as close to the original as possible. Staff is recommending approval of this application, with the condition that the certificate
of approval would expire in three years if they have not gotten a building permit. And with that, I can take any questions. Any questions for Carolyn? You mentioned that the
opening was not being changed. So it's the same size door. To my knowledge that the dimensions appear to be I'll ask I'll ask the. Okay. Okay, great. Thank
you. Okay. Now, I guess we open the floor to the applicant if you would step up. Well, we're here actually for the next item
on the agenda. Oh, so there's nobody here for this. For that. Oh, okay. That's okay. Is there a need? It's okay with you guys?
No. I'm good. Okay. No. It's fine. Well, if we are going to act on it, I think I would at least want to say something about the opening to make sure
the opening was not being changed. If you did feel comfortable making an approval, you can make that an additional condition of the approval, the
motion. Would that work for you guys? Well, it would be the same. We don't. Well, I asked Carolyn and she wasn't sure. Okay, just make the motion to
include that. Yeah. Okay. If somebody wants to do that, I can do it. Make a motion. I'll make a motion to approve, deeming that it is the same size as the
existing door and fiberglass, 15 light. I second. I'm sorry, Michelle. I didn't hear that. Deemed to approve. As long as
it's the same size as the existing door. Fiberglass 15 light configuration. Okay. Okay.
Any discussion? No. Let's go for a vote. Miss Ryan. Yes, Miss Howard? Yes. Mr. Parker? Yes.
Mr. Mrozinski? Yes. And. Okay. Good. Let's move on to B application 25.30. Certificate
of Appropriateness. To demolish a contributing structure at 318 banana. Carolyn. So this slide is showing you the location and
the land use context. Subject property is located in the Fruit Bowl neighborhood adjacent to kind of sandwiched in between
our special area plan downtown and Spring Bayou. And this shows its location just on the southern edge of the local
historic district. This slide just gives you some basic information about the subject property. It is a circa 1954
masonry vernacular residence. It is contributing to the local historic district. And the applicant is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness
to potentially demolish the contributing structure. This is the picture from the Florida master site file of the subject property. I can note it has the
jealousy windows. Some some security grilles with decorative scroll work. These Doric columns
with this off centered entryway portico. And this brick facade. Here's a view of the property
today. A few weeks ago. This is showing from the west elevation facing east. I will note that this vacant property here is
owned by the city and used for stormwater. The south elevation. Just just to note that this
garage is contemporary. It is not a contributing structure. And showing you a bit of the north elevation and just some
context. Showing the. The Boys and Girls Club is over here. Across the street is a 1926
contributing altered bungalow. As you know, the fruit bowl is a very eclectic neighborhood with many periods of significance and
different types of structures within it. So with that, we're going to go through the guidelines for demolition. So
the first would be the historic architectural or cultural significance of the building. This building has no special significance. That has been documented that I was able to
find, beyond the fact that it is a contributing structure in the local district. Number two, the importance of the building or structure to the ambiance of the
district or to patterns of land uses reflecting cultural traditions of the community or local ethnic group. Again, there's no known documented significance to this individual
structure. Beyond that, it contributes to the local historic district. You know, like I said, the fruit bowl has a range of styles and periods of
significance. However, demolition of the structure would alter the streetscape and increase the area of vacant property within our local
historic district. Demolition and redevelopment would also alter the historic streetscape, but in the case of demolition and redevelopment, the
redevelopment plans would be required to conform with guidelines and gain HPV approval. Although this this is
a modest structure of known, no known special significance. It is a contributing structure in our local historic district, and every time we demolish one of
those structures, removal of any contributing structure chips away at the integrity of the district. So it's up to you guys
to determine if this alteration is significantly adverse. So our third criteria would be the difficulty or impossibility of reproducing such a building
because of its design, texture, material detail, or unique location. There's really nothing that would be difficult to reproduce about this structure.
And the setting is not unique, unique to a residential masonry vernacular structure. Criteria for is whether the building or structure is one of the last
remaining examples of its kind in the district or in the city. There are 107 masonry vernacular structures in the district. 38
of them were built in the same time period between 1950 and 1959. Of the 38 remaining masonry vernacular structures built in the 1950s, none of them
have the unique combination of features of the subject property. So talking about the front roof portico, the Doric columns, the off center entry, the asymmetric asymmetrical
brick facade, jealousy windows, the sills, and the security grilles with the scroll work. There's no other one that has that exact same combination of
features. However, there are many examples of masonry vernacular structures from this time period throughout the city that do incorporate a
combination of these features, so the HPB should determine if there's a sufficient representation of 1950s residential masonry vernacular
style in the district and throughout the city. Number five is the future utilization of the site or group occupancy of the
structure. So this site is located in 60, which is a one and two family residential district. Due to the size of the lot. The only uses that would be
permitted by right would be emergency service facilities, public parks and recreation facilities, schools of general education, and a single family detached dwelling. So I think it
would be important that the HPB condition any approval to require an HPB approved plan for the site prior to the issuance of any demolition permit, because we don't know what is
going to be replaced with, we don't know if it's just going to be more vacant land. So we would need to know what's going to be there in the future before we
demolish it. Criteria six is whether the reasonable measures can be taken to save the building structure or traditional cultural property, and the applicant hasn't
provided any information about the damage or that the property is unusable. However, I saw personally that the structure was flooded and damaged in the
recent hurricanes and I personally witnessed the owners taking proper remedial action. Number criteria number seven. So
just going back to number six a little bit. I can't really make a determination of whether reasonable measures can be taken to save the building, but I can attest that they did take those
first steps to at least remediate the damage that had been done. Criteria seven is whether the building is capable of earning a reasonable economic
return on its value, and whether the perpetuation of the building, considering its physical condition, its location, and the anticipated expense of rehabilitation would
be economically feasible. So normally this standard compels the HPB to compare the current property to the value of the restored property and analyze
whether the cost of restoration is justified. So the applicant, the applicant didn't provide any kind of costs for the restoration of the property. And
the applicant is actually seeking the Certificate of Appropriateness to facilitate the sale of the property. So we don't really know if the person who purchased it is going to
want to rehabilitate it, or if they're going to want to demolish it, providing the applicant with with the Certificate of Appropriateness may help them be able to sell
the property. And from that point, it would all be under your purview. What happens to it? So. In that case, I would
again caution that if the HPB recommend if the HPB approves this, I would recommend a condition that we have an approved plan before that
demolition permit is issued. So the Pinellas County Property Appraiser set the 2024 just
market value at 200,021 two. It's up there. 221652. So a little $220,000 roughly. I can't
give you an expert opinion regarding a reasonable economic return on the property. I can tell you with the entitlements available for the property, a new single family home
significantly exceeding that value could be constructed there. And then we probably noticed this and did not receive
any responses to the public notice. So I am not making a recommendation except for if you choose to approve it, I will
follow the parameters of guideline 41, making sure the property is properly documented before demolition occurs. That we would not issue a demolition
permit without HPB approved plans for redevelopment, and the standard that it would expire in three years. If a building permit has not been issued that
I can take any questions. I have one question. When we're talking about this being used prior for
sale, if we give a. Condition of demolition to with the condition that we find out what they're going to do with it, does that transfer to the new owner or is
it the old owner, or is it comes with the it stays with the with the property, runs with the property. It would be with the property. Yes. Okay. Did you say
the city owns it? The city owns the lot next to it. Next to it? Okay. Okay. Any other questions
for Carolyn? Thank you. Okay. Hang on. I need to come up to the podium right there. Thank you. Okay. If there are no more questions for Carolyn, we will
now hear from you. So state your name, please. Yes. My name is Chris Wallace. I live in Tampa, Florida. I am the nephew of the
person who owns the house. Her name is Kelly Opie. She is going to turn 103 years old this month. She lives at Westchester
Gardens, which is a nursing facility. And I have her durable power of attorney along with my cousin, her other nephew, Chris
Lambrianou, who couldn't be here tonight. So I can give you a little background here if it would be relevant for all of you
to know. Kelly's, we call her Kelly, her full name, Kelly Opie, but but Kelly's treatment at Westchester is very
expensive. The monthly costs are extremely high. The house is her major asset. Her cash is has been compromised as she's gotten
older, and she's needed a lot of medical treatment and to live elsewhere. So what my cousin and I want to do for Kelly is get
her property sold to generate cash for her so she can continue to pay her bills at Westchester. And the reason for the
application here is we want to have the ability throughout broker to represent to a prospective buyer that, insofar as the Heritage Board is
concerned, it would be possible subject to bringing, as a staff said, an appropriate plan for what's going to be done on the property to demolish this
property and build something else. Whether a buyer may want to do that, we don't know at this point. We're trying to get maximum flexibility to maximize
what our aunt can get for this property, because she needs the money. I did want to add, in addition to what Caroline has
said, this property was severely damaged in the last hurricane in 2024, took about three feet of water. And yes, through my
cousin and his wife, Penny. Brianna's efforts, a lot of remediation was done, but it is not in habitable condition right now. There is a lot of board
missing, appliances missing. Everything was severely damaged. It was also flooded not nearly as much a couple of inches the
year before in the storm in 2023. So if this property needs to be sold and a buyer perceives that they have no ability to raise the structure and build
another one or change the structure, again subject to approval of those plans, it's going to be very hard to sell. And we think that the historical
value, while I certainly understand everything that Caroline has said, is outweighed whatever historical value there is, is outweighed by the need
here to be able to sell this property and at least have some flexibility for what can be done with it. And so that's the
reason for the application. And I'm happy to take any questions that any of you may, may have.
And by the way, the staff recommendations and various things that Caroline has said ought to be in this, if it's approved, we have no objection
to at all. Does she own that property? The empty lot next door? No city. Every rainstorm that's under water. Yes it is.
It is. I think Caroline said the city owns that. City owns that and uses it for storm water for that. Right? Yeah. She has had that house since it was built.
She lived in it with her mother. Kelly was never married. And father? That's right. Yes. Yeah. But she doesn't live in it any longer. And we want to use it
for her benefit. That's. That's the whole reason we're here. Garage underwater also. Yes. Did
you want to say anything? Okay. Are there any other questions for me? I guess not. No. Did you
want to? Hello, everyone. My name is Michael Frangoudis. I've been a Pinellas County resident for 51 years. I grew up on Clearwater Beach since I was nine years old. Seen a lot of
changes in the area. I try to put the property under contract twice with the brothers that own it now, and my family bought it from the Pappas family and we sold it to the Lowe family that
owns it. Now. We're just trying to see if we can put something up there. So we're all about redevelopment and growing up, I felt honored to be brought onto this property, which was very
sentimental to me, knowing the family and the history, I'm all about preservation. I do own a little property in beach, which I did keep throughout the years because I didn't want to see big development come in and build up
all around us. One of the unique things about this property is that it does. It is in the historic district, which I respect 100% noticing the
property. I agree with you that it didn't have any significant historic culture on it. Of the 30 properties that were built
between 1950 and 59, economically feasible, it's not worth it. The whole house was flooded twice. It's already gutted out because it's full of mold from all the salt water that came up. Everything is a
mess in there. You can't even walk in there without wearing a mask. So it's to the point that it's just not worth for somebody to invest the money into to fix
it. And I understand the condition also of the owner being of her age and stage and financial condition. The main thing of this property is for me
as a realtor, it's also to make it marketable. Right? And I sat down and talked with the family, and all we're trying to do is give options to whoever comes in
and buys this property, to give them the ability to see a new vision, right? Whether it's preserving what's already there. But again, it's got to have economic value because
everybody's going to go spend $250,000 and just have it sit there. They want to see their money work somehow and grow in different directions. Or maybe somebody that just wants to leave it as is because it has a
historic significance, and they want to keep looking at every day for what it is. Right. And I respect that. So from a developer side of you, you look at it and saying, what can you
do to give somebody the options? So all we're doing is I request what you guys have with the condition, which I think is smart. The three years is plenty of time to market a property with a condition to whoever's in
to come in and purchase that property, whether it's to keep the property and add on to it. Right, or to demolish it and add something new so that we don't
know. But as a marketer, I like to, you know, I'm happy that they chose to have the option to do what they can with the property to make it more marketable. Right? So it brings
in more value to the city of Tarpon Springs, and it's a matter of growth. So I like the recommendations. I think the three years more than enough. I think the HPD Historic District
should have approval of the final say. And if we can market it with that open option that the city allows us, then it's easier to promote the property,
whether it's to keep it and preserve and expand on it, or to add on and allow somebody to buy it as is, demolish it and add something new, that's all. Any
questions? No. Questions for him. Thank you, thank you. Carolyn, did you have any more
comments about anything? No. Okay. Why don't we discuss this before we make any motions? What
do you guys. What do you guys think? Okay. Yeah. All right. Yep. What? Yeah, I'm with that. Oh, okay. I'll talk about first.
Yeah? Yeah. Well, personally, I'm. I'm kind of a fix and don't tear down person. But I also
understand what's going on here right now. I will never be a person that says a building has no significance, whether
historic or otherwise. But again, I understand what's going on here. And I and I do know too, that the owners did try to
mitigate. So they did make an attempt, as we all did in the neighborhood. I live right around the corner. I do too,
yeah. So we know exactly what happened. I personally wouldn't have a big problem with allowing
it to be demoed as long as we had that control over the prospective buyer to see if that
was the route they were going to take. We would have to see the plans. We'd have to get an idea of what what they want to do,
what right. And we still would have some control over that. That's kind of how I feel about it. I have to agree with you
there I agree. Yeah, yeah, it's there's a lot of these houses around, you know, it's kind of a cool little house. I mean, it's just a little box, but it's kind
of a cool little house. I pass it three, four times a day. I pass it every day. Yeah. It's
nice to hear the history of it. Tell you the truth. Yeah. If. If anybody wants to make a motion, if we've discussed it enough, do you have any more questions
about anything or comments? No. I'll let you do it this way. Okay. I'll make a motion to accept the. To approval with the
condition stated by the staff. Okay. And that was again. That was to do we have to be more specific about how anyone comes
in front of us. I mean, do we have to mention prospective buyers or anything like that, or. I'm not sure that we do because. The CA will run with
the property. So they're not going to be able to get a demo permit until they come with plans that you approve. Yeah, they'd have to come before us
for approval for any kind of structure build also. Correct. Yeah. So but but they would also have to come in front of us if they want to tear it down. Right. So this this would, this
puts everything out in front. This is, is, is assisting in the sale of the property by taking one, one step out of the process. So they've already got
potentially you can demolish it. Just tell us what you're going to do with it after you do so. So. It's still going to have to
come before you again, right? It's just the board at this point. I'll allow it. Okay. You need to come back up here. Go
ahead. Was there a second, sir? Yeah, and I apologize. We should have cleared this up. So I guess there's two parts to the motion. I would assume one is if it's
acceptable to tear it down. Right. That would be, I guess, option number one. And number two, I don't know. It's not a condition because whoever tears it down obviously is going to want to build. And they have to
go by the guidelines and the codes of Tarpon Springs, Pinellas County guidelines to go ahead and build something new. Right. So the question is, is and all we're asking is the
option, whoever buys this property at their option, right. If they can tear it down, depending on whatever they're going to build. And of course, the what the question is, whatever they're going to build
is that the has to be accepted by the zoning and permitting department of, of the city. That's it. So I just want to clear it's two different issues. We're actually only acting on what your application is. And I
think your application just states option to tear it down. Right. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We're yeah I will now close the public
comments. But but thank you. Let's let's hear that motion again. And motion is to accept the. Approve the demolishment
under conditions that the permit will not be issued until the board approves the site of the
future site development. Do you want to just say. Subject to the three conditions as presented by the city, that's even better.
Okay. Yeah. Thank you. That's that's even better I like that. Does anybody want to second that? I'll second it. Okay. We
have a motion and a second. Any more discussion. No. No. If not, roll call please. Miss Ryan. Yes, Miss Howard? Yes, Mr. Sprecher? Yes. Mr. Mrozinski?
Yes, yes. Okay. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Very good presentations. Thank you, thank you. Graduated from high school,
Peter. And I realized so did my father and brother in the early 1940s. So it's kind of a privilege to be here. That's great. Tell her we said hi. Next
time you talk to her, wish her well. Okay. Number seven, board and staff comments. Any more comments from staff about
anything? Just briefly, I was able to attend some CLG training recently, so hopefully I have some some further knowledge to help you guys out with. Great.
That'll be great. We need all the help we can get. Definitely anything you guys want to talk about. Questions? Carolyn I know we get all these these recommendations from the
guidelines, but in those are probably kind of more general guidelines for cities all around the country. Florida being kind of unique. I mean, you know,
we've had to we all bend for materials. You know, fiberglass vinyl because you want to make things last longer. Have we ever thought about adding some of these stipulations in because
Florida is unique area would just doesn't last here. So I would say our guidelines are not general. They're very unique to the city of Tarpon Springs. They
were recently done. And this is a topic of debate within the preservation community. And there is growing leniency to things and looking at it in a
more balanced approach of will this help preserve the structure for the future, and is it were appropriate? Would honestly, you know, it's just a pain but it
can last. I've seen it last for hundreds of years. If you properly maintain your wood even in the darkest swampiest environments, they they live on
having, having owned having owned a historic home of my own in New Orleans, which is a lot, lot swampier than here. That's true. If you're using the right woods and you're maintaining
they they can last for a very long time. So when we get something that's still in good condition, let's not let people rip it out. You know, make them repair it and maintain it. But when things do deteriorate
beyond, let's maybe take a balanced approach and look at the bigger picture, which is preserving that structure and having it exist in the future. I was just saying, because that fiberglass door, I mean, that's
a very general and look, that was a steel door. So is basically the same thing. Like why that could have been just a simple you should have been able
to approve steel to fiberglass. I mean, if we want to at some point take, take another look at, at our, at our ordinance that we just took a look at. We
can we can do that. Thank you. But I do think it's important when we're not using original materials. I think these things
get off scale a lot of the time. So for that particular house, you know, it's pretty prominent. It's pretty large, pretty significant historically. I want
everything that the guidelines tell me you need to look at for you guys to look at. For more modest homes. I don't know, maybe, maybe, but they're all
important. So even this proposed potential demolition, it's a tiny little house. There's nothing particularly significant about it, but it's all of the it's a piece of the puzzle that
creates this unique community. So we need to yes, we need we need to be measured and balanced and practical. But we do kind of
need to be hard and difficult at times to, to preserve what's really important. I think we do that well here. Find a balance always in life, find a balance.
Okay. Thanks. Any more comments from the board or from staff? If
not, we are adjourned at 712. Thank you.