►
From YouTube: Heritage Preservation Board November 7, 2016
Description
Description
C
E
A
B
B
C
F
C
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
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
establish
criteria
contained
in
the
Code
of
Ordinances
in
order
to
make
a
legal
decision
regarding
the
application
before
it.
C
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
ordinance,
then
the
board
is
required
by
the
law
to
find
a
favor
of
the
applicant.
D
C
Anyone
who
is
wishing
to
speak
this
evening,
could
you
please
stand
and
raise
your
right
hand
to
be
sworn
in.
Do
you
swear
from
the
testimony
you're
about
to
give
is
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
Ok,
as
there
are
only
three
members
of
the
board
here
tonight,
a
unanimous
vote
is
required
by
all
three
board
members
in
order
for
the
application
to
pass
and
a
certificate
to
be
issued.
B
E
A
A
record
Lisa
Wargo
principal
planner,
the
city
of
Tarpon
Springs,
is
requesting
a
certificate
approval
to
construct
a
city
parking
public
parking
lot
the
parking
lot.
The
proposed
parking
lot
is
located
south
of
the
alley
which
is
located
south
of
Tarpon
Avenue
and
between
South
Korea
and
South
gross
avenues,
and
a
portion
of
the
proposed
construction
site
lies
within
a
parcel
with
a
contributing
structure.
A
City,
Water
Works,
building
located
on
a
northeast
corner
of
the
project
site.
A
The
waterworks
building
is
a
structure
built
in
1916
and
constructed
a
brick
and
concrete
block
that
houses
a
well
that
still
exists
today.
The
large
front
entry
door
was
later
partially
enclosed,
circa
nineteen
sanity,
an
accessory
garage
storage
structure
located
to
the
south,
was
added
on
the
rear,
the
main
structure
at
a
later
date-
circa,
nineteen,
seventy,
but
the
true
date
is
not
is
unknown.
The
accessory
garage,
carport
portion
of
the
structure
consists
of
concrete
cinder
blocks
and
shingled
roof.
A
It's
staffs
opinion
that
the
garage
carport
portion
of
the
structure
due
to
the
method
of
construction
and
the
materials
used
was
erroneously
included
in
the
Florida
master
site
file.
As
part
of
the
original
waterworks
structure,
it
is
borsa.
It
is
this
portion
of
the
entire
structure
that
is
proposed
for
demolition
to
make
room
for
parking
spaces
in
the
new
lot.
A
If
it
is
determined
by
this
board
that
the
structure
is
part
of
the
original
Water
Works
building,
a
request
for
certificate
of
approval
or
demolition
of
the
accessory
portion
of
the
structure
will
be
presented
at
the
next
HP
be
meeting
the
structure
is
located
adjacent
and
to
the
west
I'm.
Sorry,
the
structure
located
adjacent
and
to
the
west
of
the
historic
Water
Works
building
will
also
be
demolished.
The
structure
is
not
designated
as
historic
or
contributing
structure
and
was
not
permitted.
A
Parking
lot
will
consist
of
approximately
36
parking
spaces
and
can
also
be
used
for
planned
events.
Entrances
will
be
located
off
of
south
spread
of
South
bring
Avenue
and
the
alley
to
the
north
of
the
site.
Only
one
exit
will
be
planned
for
the
lot
located
off
South
gross
Avenue
and
a
foot
deep
landscape
buffer
is
planned
for
three-quarters
of
the
site
boundaries
where
the
review
criteria
and
analysis
and
review
an
application
for
the
certificate
of
approval.
The
board
shall
consider
the
following
criteria:
numbers
one
and
two.
A
Number
five
is
size.
Amass
of
the
building
after
alterations
shall
be
reflective
of
buildings,
original
architecture,
staffs
findings,
removal
of
all
the
construction,
material
and
out
stock
outside
storage
items
within
the
parcel
and
the
addition
of
new
landscaping
and
lighting
should
open
up
the
area
adjacent
to
the
waterworks,
historical
structure
and
creative
or
aesthetic
appearance
for
these
parcels.
Next
to
the
waterworks
structure,
number
six
luan
scape
and
shall
enhance
their
architectural
character
and
appearance
of
the
structure
or
additional
cultural
property
and
protect
open
spaces
and
pedestrian
ways.
A
Des
findings
are,
then
an
eight
foot,
deep
landscaping
buffer
will
be
surrounding
the
project.
We
do
not
find
number
seven
applicable
number.
Eight.
All
structures
shall
be
recognized
as
products
of
their
own
time
and
shall
not
attempt
to
create
an
earlier
appearance
than
the
original
date
of
construction
staffs
findings.
A
Staff
is
discussed,
proposed
demolition
of
accessory
parking
structure
with
our
engineering
and
utility
staff
members
and
emphasize
that
any
actions
directly
affecting
the
waterworks
structure
must
be
in
compliance
with
design
guidelines.
Since
this
is
a
city
project,
it
must
go
through
the
bidding
process
in
contract,
rock
I'm,
sorry
and
contracting
out
the
work,
and
it
is
staffs
opinion
that
a
contractor
chosen
should
have
experience
of
working
around
and
with
historical
structures
number
ten.
A
The
proposed
project
shall
conform
to
the
requirements
of
this
code
and
be
in
compliance
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
Comprehensive
Plan
staffs
findings.
The
request
has
been
reviewed
and
approved
through
the
city's
technical
review
committee
and
will
require
permitting,
through
the
city's
building
the
development
department
and
number
11.
The
impact
upon
architecture.
A
Archaeological
sites
shall
preserve
the
integrity
of
the
site,
stats
findings.
No
archaeological
sites
will
be
impacted.
Staffs
recommendation
is
that
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
city's
request
construct
the
public
parking
lot
with
the
following
recommended
conditions
that
number
one
approval
of
the
parking
lot
project
and
started.
D
B
So
here's
here's
kind
of
where
I
struggle
with
this,
with
this
and
and
why
this
is
coming
to
to
this
board
when
the
master
site
file
was
done,
there
was
no
differentiation
between
the
actual
original
Water
Works
building
that
has
since
been
restored,
since
this
was
done,
and
this
additional
area
that
you
know
is
the
three
Bay's
it's
kind
of
really
deteriorated
as
a
result,
really
there's
nothing
in
the
design
guidelines
or
in
your
section
of
code.
That
says
that
you
can't
interpret
this
and
determine
you
know
you.
B
This
is
ideally
the
what
that
structure,
what
we
believe
to
be
the
historic
structure
I
mean
we
have
to
just
assume
that
it
was
done
on
a
survey.
I
know
of
at
least
one
instance
that
we've
identified
that
there
was
something
that
was
erroneously
included
on
one
of
these,
and
that
was
the
one
where
the
map
was
incorrect.
So
from
time
to
time,
things
tend
to
get
put
on
here.
If,
in
fact,
that
addition
was
put
on
in
the
70s,
it
didn't
qualify
under
the
criteria
anyway,
that
you
used
to
assess
your
master
site
file.
B
So
really
it's
one
of
those
things
that
you
have
a
right
to
interpret
this
material,
all
the
material
we
give
you
as
to
whether
or
not
you
want
to
require
that
certificate
approve
of
approval
for
the
demolition
of
this
portion
of
the
structure.
Recognizing
that
staff
is
telling
you
it
appears
to
have
been
done
later.
It
appears
to
have
been
erroneously
included
in
the
master
site
file,
but
because
it's
there,
we
needed
basically
an
interpretation
of
this
board
that
you
agree
with
staff
that
you
know
this
building
staying
there
and
crumbling.
B
If
that's,
what
eventually
happens
to
it
is,
could
produce
damage
to
another
structure,
with
that
we've
put
significant
money
into
actually
the
Public
Works
folks
and
put
significantly
much
money
and
time
into
renovating.
So
as
a
result,
we'd
rather
not
see
that
situation
happen.
I'd
want
to
further
have
this
building
deteriorate
to
a
point,
and
we
just
save
it
just
because
we
don't
know
what
to
do
with
it
here.
I
would
rather
struggle
with
it
here
tonight
and
say
you
know.
B
This
is
a
portion
that
we
recognize
that
was
included
in
the
master
site,
fall
on
the
fact
that
we
weren't
looking
at
things
in
the
70s,
because
if
we
were
looking
at
things
in
the
70s,
then
we
should
have
done
the
same
thing
down
with
the
with
the
faith
chapel.
When
we
looked
at
their
sanctuary
in
the,
in
addition
that
they're
putting
on
to
the
sanctuary,
because
that
building
a
circa
nineteen
seventy
two-
and
I
would-
I
would
argue
that
you
know
it-
has
its
own
value.
B
However,
in
this
particular
case,
because
you're
dealing
with
a
portion
of
a
structure
that
is
structurally
unsound,
at
least
based
on
what
the
building
development
director
has
has
determined
and
provided
in
your
packet
pictures
and
descriptions.
I
would
say
that
you're
on
equal
footing
with
this,
for
you
to
make
a
determination
that
this
portion
of
the
building
does
not
require
certificate
of
approval,
because
it
was
erroneously
at
it.
One
cluded
and
I'll.
Let
Erica
from.
C
D
B
Just
a
caution
with
that
in
the
future,
we
don't
want
to
be
just
randomly
saying:
oh
well,
it's
okay,
we
have
this.
I
mean
there
was
a
port
or
there
was
a
purpose
to
these
to
these
master
site
files
and
I
know
you
guys
tend
to
err
on
the
side
of
caution
anyway,
but
just
this
may
be
one
of
those
cases
that
you
find.
G
Evening
Tom
function,
public
works
director
that
I'll
have
exact
date.
I
know
it
dates
back
probably
into
the
early
1900's.
It
was
a
well
house,
of
course,
all
these
years.
The
structure
itself
at
one
time,
I
believe
dating
back
to
probably
early
seventies,
was
once
a
public
work.
Shard
sleep,
maintenance,
I
believe
look
at
the
structure
that
that
accessory
garage
was
put
on
there.
The
meat
needs
in
them
around
nineteen.
Seventy
seventy-five
when
the
other
work
was
done
to
that
building
via
front
door,
almost
matches
the
same
exact
type
of
construction.
Okay,
the.
D
B
Do
approve
parking
lots
and
I'll
give
you
the
example
of
that
when
we
looked
at
st.
somewhere,
we
had
many
things.
One
of
the
things
that
you
approve
there
was
the
handicapped
parking
lot
of
the
handicapped
parking
space,
the
couple
of
spaces
that
he
has
there
you
do
what
you
do
look
at
those
to
make
sure
that
the
parking
and
or
any
accesses
vehicle
access
with
that
type
of
thing
are
consistent
with
your
design
guidelines.
Thank.
B
E
B
B
G
H
My
Kaiser,
we
have
the
kc
q
barbecue,
which
is
next
to
st.
somewhere
on
that
and
I'm
all
for
the
parking
lot,
because
we
need
more
parking
downtown.
If
we're
wanting
to
proceed
with
this,
trying
to
develop
the
restaurants
and
people
walking
the
streets
and
having
an
area
to
park
as
we're
running
out
of
it
but
I'm
all
for
it.
E
D
E
E
B
D
E
E
B
Has
one
comment:
what
I'm
gonna
pass
out
now
is
just
the
public
hearing
scheduled
for
next
year
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
got
this
if
there's
anything
that
any
of
the
meeting
dates
that
are
a
problem.
If
you
could,
let
me
know
like
in
the
next
week
or
so
maybe
two
weeks
we
can
adjust
those
or
talk
about
those,
but
this
is
just
this
is
just
we've
taken
into
account
any
holidays
and
things
that
I've
had
to
adjust
up
and
down
based
on
Monday
holidays.
B
Unfortunately,
your
schedule
gets
a
little
bit
you
and
Planning,
and
Zoning
Board
have
a
little
bit
of
trouble
because
of
one
Monday
holidays
fall.
So
as
a
result,
we've
had
to
adjust
some
of
those
dates,
specifically
the
one
for
the
9th
is
adjusted
as
a
result
of
epiphany
and
the
other
holidays
that
fall
in
that
in
that
timeframe,
but
other
than
that.
I
just
wanted
to
present
this.
Give
it
to
you.
If
you
see
anything,
that's
glare,
then
we'll
we
can
address
that.
Just
obviously
just
pop
me
an
email.
B
Let
me
know
if
you
know
ahead
of
time
that
you're
not
going
to
be
there
for
meeting.
If
you
want
to,
let
me
know
we'll
put
it
in
the
notebook
and
have
it
ahead
and
for
folks,
if
you're
back,
you
know
wouldn't
want
it.
You
know
when
you're
taking
time
for
next
year
and
then
the
other
thing
that
I
have
is
your
elections
will
be
coming
up
in
January.
B
So
we'll
put
that
on
the
agenda
for
january,
I'm
trying
to
get
all
the
boards
to
get
back
to
a
January
schedule,
because
we've
had
so
much
disruption
on
boards
in
the
last
six
months
to
a
year.
I
want
to
get
you
guys
back
on
normal
schedule,
so
everybody
is
doing
things
at
the
same
time,
so
we're
going
to
try
to
do
that
for
January.
B
Just
so
you'll
be
all
set,
and
we
can
continue
on
that
way.
I,
don't
think.
There's
anybody
on
this
board
that
is
actually
rolling
off
there,
because
they're
adjusting
they're
getting
into
the
point
where
they're
adjusting
how
your
appointments
are
done.
That
ordinance
hasn't
really
been
adopted
at
this
point,
but
I
don't
think
that
we
looked
at
that
and
I
don't
think.
There's
anybody
on
this
board.
That's
going
to
be
rolling
off.
Most
of
the
folks
are
either
on
for
another
whole
year
or
on
for,
like
the
middle
of
the
year,.
C
B
As
a
result,
we
shouldn't
have,
we
should
not
have
any
disruption,
hopefully
knock
on
wood.
Everyone
stays
on
the
board,
but
other
than
that.
That's
all
that
I
have
for
staff
comments
and
we'll
let
you
know
when
the
appointment
schedule
is
adjusted
and
how
that's
going
to
work
when
we
get
there.
It's
just
some
time
before
the
boc
is
going
to.
You
know
address
that.
Okay,.