All right, I'm going to call this meeting to order at 630. Roll call please. Mr. Rosinski here, Mr. Sprecher here. Miss
Howlett here. Miss Kaplan and Mr. Cadena are absent. Okay, before I go any further, what I have to do is mention that we
have a quorum. But it's just three of us. And if it's just three, if the applicant. Oh, you're not okay. Yeah, well, I
guess it's a moot point then, isn't it? I don't need to. I don't need to ask anybody that right. No applicant. Well, I'll finish my sentence. What the
deal is, if we we have a quorum because it's a five person committee, but the applicant has the opportunity to not have
their case heard if it's only three people. Okay, because they have to have three votes. Because that's that's true. All. That's right. All of us would
have to vote, right? It would have to be unanimous vote. Right. Yeah. Okay. But we're going to move ahead. Any public comments, sir, in the audience here, the only one in the
audience. Any public comments that have nothing to do with what's on the agenda? Thank you. I'm just here to get a feel for
what happens. Okay. Great. Welcome. Thank you. All right. We're going to look at the minutes from October 13th. Did
you guys have a chance to look them over. And if they all look good I'd like to have a motion. I'll make a motion that we accept them as is. Okay, I
second all right. We have a motion and a second call for a vote. Miss Howard. Yes, Mr.
Sprecher? Yes, Mr. Mrozinski? Yes. Okay. Number five, quasi judicial announcement and swearing in of speakers. I don't know that we have any
speakers, but 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 borders required by law to find against
the applicant. Thank you. All right. Number six, applications. Application 25-83 Certificate of Appropriateness. To install
a sign on the roof of the subject contributing altered structure at ten South Pinellas Avenue. It doesn't look like
the applicant is here. We can still have this meeting if you guys. Unless. Are you the applicant by any chance? You're not okay? No, he's up there.
Have we heard anything from the applicant? I have not, I can go check and see if I've got anything in my office. I feel like this is a fairly
straightforward case. Yeah, and it would be acceptable to hear it without the applicant present, but I'll leave that up to the board. Yeah. How do you guys feel about that? I feel we
can keep on going. You want to move ahead with it? Yeah. Okay. It's kind of. All right, let's
move ahead. Do we need to swear me in? Yeah. Go ahead. You
swear or affirm that your testimony before the Heritage Preservation Board shall be the
truth, so help you? I do thank you.
For. Okay. This is application 2583 for Catalinas
at ten South Pinellas Avenue. This slide shows the location and context of the subject property at the corner of
Pinellas and Court Street. The slide shows the location of the subject property within the National Register and local historic districts. The
applicant is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a sign on the roof of the subject contributing altered structure, which is a
circa 1930 Tudor Revival. It is the only commercial Tudor Revival style property within the national and local historic
districts. This slide shows the the property on the 1909 and 1913. Sanborn. Historically, the site included some
outbuildings for the Ferns Hotel, which was formerly the Tropical Hotel, which was managed by Walter and Mother Mears, who we have a mural to
in downtown. This slide shows the 1919 Sanborn where the building had changed again, and then by the 1926 Sanborn, the site was cleared. This is a
photograph from the Florida master site file. And this is the facade of the subject property. Before any construction activities had
taken place. This is a photograph of the facade taken recently. This is showing the the north elevation of the
building and some context to the south. Some additional southern context. A view of the south elevation showing some of the context looking north. This
is the back or the west elevation of the building. Some additional context for you. And then this one's really showing this the subject property in
the context of the kind of the gateway to to our city, our historic district. At least this slide shows you the
proposed location for the sign. This is just reminding you of the previously approved project that that has been ongoing at
the site. Survey of the property. And here the plans for the proposed project, which is a sign on the roof. The
relevant standards for review for certificate of appropriateness for this project would be new construction, consistency, neighborhood and district context, roof shape and texture, architectural features,
adherence to Secretary's guidelines and conformance with the code requirements with respect to standard one. The
proposed site sign height and width is consistent with other signs on adjacent contributing structures. Number three. The
proposed sign would slightly alter the streetscape. However, the impact to the streetscape is not considered to be significantly adverse with
respect to number four, the steeply pitched roof on on the. The structure is one of its most distinct architectural features. It has been altered
through the use of a metal roof. However, the the chimney, the brick, the original brick chimneys remain, and the addition to of the sign on the
roof would not be a significantly adverse impact. I think it may even be could be viewed as a positive impact by kind of breaking up that kind
of jarring metal roof a little bit. With respect to I'm sorry, going back with respect to
standard seven. The proposed project is an easily removable alteration and would not further impact the historic integrity of the structure. It
would preserve the remaining architectural features and wouldn't affect them in any way, and finally, with respect to
number two, with respect to number nine, the project generally meets the intent of the Secretary of Interior standards and is in conformance
with other city code requirements and the Comprehensive Plan. And then here's just a relevant page from the Design Guidelines Review manual. It wouldn't be
obscuring or hiding any significant historical features. So with that I would recommend approval of application 2583 with our normal condition that
the Certificate of appropriateness would expire within three years of a building permit has not been issued for the project. And
with that I can take any any questions. I know we don't really deal with ordinances or anything, but the sizes all
legal. And you mentioned that it's okay to be on on the roof. It doesn't have to be freestanding. There was actually a recent change that that would allow roof sign. So
yes, it is in it is in compliance with the rest with our sign code and the rest of the city land development code. Okay. Great. Thank you. What is
it? What is it made out of? Is it metal or did it say it appears to be made out of vinyl and vinyl? Oh, it is vinyl. I'm
assuming there's probably. There's metal components behind it. Oh I see, yeah, yeah, yeah, the vinyl is, is just the lettering for the sign. Color
and everything. Okay. And it's not I see that it's not laying flat against the roof. It's built out slightly projecting. So that makes that makes sense.
All right. Well it's a good looking sign I think. Any any other questions for Carolyn or. Yeah I do Carolyn. This piece
of property has been under construction for many, many years. I don't know, five years. I can say that I have any.
They're going to finish now. They got a sign. Well you know they're moving forward putting on a sign. So maybe that means they're they're going to get get some more work done. I will say that I have recently had my
four year anniversary with the city of Tarpon Springs just last month, and this property was under construction. When I started here, it was it was actually during Covid when we
were still doing zoom meetings. Right. And we approved that first one. I do know that that the owners of the property have had some. They own several, a
few, a handful of properties within the city, and they did have some impacts over the storm to some of their properties. So and, you know, things happen and they're still
within the parameters of, of their certificate of appropriateness. So I think putting a sign up is is a good sign of some movement. Maybe. Let us all hope so. Any other
questions. No I'm fine. All right. We don't have the applicant here. So there's no one to talk to or ask any questions. So. Do you guys need
to talk about it at all. But my my view is it's you know, it would be acceptable. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. It'll be a rundown
building with a beautiful sign. Well, actually, if there's no other discussion, somebody can make a motion one way or the
other. You go do it. Oh, man. I'll make a motion to accept the application as written with the conditions that the staff
is okay, a second. Okay, okay. We have a motion and a second and there's no other discussion. So let's call for a vote, Miss
Howard. Miss Howard? Yes, Mr. Sprecher? Yes, Mr. Mrozinski. Yes. Okay, great. Number seven,
board and staff comments. Any questions or comments from the board about anything? Carolyn, do you have anything else? No,
sir. Okay. Well. 645, we are in adjournment. Definitely. You witnessed one of our fastest, shortest meetings. It is
usually not this short. Yeah. Would you come to the next month, please? Yeah. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you everyone. People up there.