Contemporary buildings for the Seville Square Hitoric District, Pensacola, Florida


Material Information

Contemporary buildings for the Seville Square Hitoric District, Pensacola, Florida
Physical Description:
237p. : ill., photocopies.
Brown, Lewis Jr.
College of Architecture, University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, FL
Publication Date:


General Note:
HP AFA document 225

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All rights reserved by the source institution.
System ID:

Full Text








Map of the Historic District 1

Introduction 2

Fabric of the District 6

Existing Buildings Within the District
Without Architectural Significance 10

Recent New Construction Within the Historic
District 13

Exterior Factors Influencing the District 25

Guidelines 30

Summary 35


Photographs 45

Letter from George Demmy to Lewis Brown 60

Letter from Hugh Leitch to Lewis Brown 62

Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola 65

Historic Zoning Ordinance 68

A Uniform System for Official Signs in
Pensacola's Seville Square 81

Design Guidelines from HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PLAN, Savannah, Georgia 100


Planning Board Subcommittee and Planning
Staff Report 126

I-110 Commercial Park Information 134

Pensacola's History 138

Municipal Services 146

by Albert Manucy, pages 70-71


House Bill Number 163 226

Senate Bill Number 1124 233



Garden Street



Pensacola Bay

's Slip

Aragon Court




Since I first moved to Pensacola in 1973, I have

watched the growth of the Seville Square Historic District

with interest. As a draftsman with Hugh Leitch-Architect

I participated in some of the architectural projects within

the district, and the exposure I received to the Seville

Square District heightened my sensitivity to the idea of

preservation in general and the future of Seville Square

Historic District in particular.

The work that has been done within the District to date,

for the most part, has been of the highest caliber; and

future plans for the District, in general, are well thought

out and are toward the well being of the District.

There is an area of concern in planning the District

that needs more investigation before the District can con-

tinue to grow. This area is the placement of buildings of

contemporary design within the boundary of the Historic District.

It will be the purpose of this paper to investigate the facts

surrounding this problem, draw a conclusion based on the facts,

and offer suggestions.

The average citizen of Pensacola who is sensitive to the

historical heritage of the city might well ask, "Why would

anyone even consider mixing contemporary buildings with build-

ings that are historically significant?" This question will be

the key theme throughout this paper. The question is a good

one, and goes to the heart of what a historic district really

is. One employee of the Pensacola Preservation Board referred

to the District as an architectural museum. I know of no

one who would disagree with that idea. One way of exam-

ining the validity of the architectural museum concept is

to compare it with established museums.

The Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C. is

probably the most famous collector of American ingenuity

and invention. The greatest examples of past accomplishments

are housed there, but right beside them are their contem-

porary counterparts. The Smithsonian recognizes the sig-

nificance of displaying new with old. Another example of

this idea is in the Pensacola area. The Naval Air Museum

at Sherman Field is dedicated to documenting the history

of Naval Air power. In this museum there is a rich mixture

of old and new. The first example of a Navy airplane is

on display within eyesight of one of the manned space modules.

World War II fighters hover next to modern mach 2 war jets.

This idea of mixing old with new in a museum can be

used as a yardstick to measure how far we have come from

where we have been. In order to fully appreciate the old

it is necessary to compare it to the new. It is possible

to make this comparison to buildings outside the District,

but the comparison isn't as accurate as it would be if it

took place between buildings of similar fabric and scale

within the District. It is extremely difficult to compare

and contrast the new multi-storied Century Bank of Pensacola

with its sharp corners and crisp white color with the gentle

scale and soft fabric of the Dorr House on the west side of

Seville Square. In order to make a true comparison of the

Dorr House and other historic structures within the District,

contemporary buildings should be within close proximity and

should be of similar scale and fabric.

The Historic District should be a place where buildings

of historical significance should be gathered. In its

Recommendation to the Council of the City of Pensacola for

a Comprehensive Historical Development Plan the Council's

Historical Advisory Committee defined historical significance

as "that out of our past which has bearing on what we are

today as a community and how we arrived at what we are."1

This idea is very easily carried into modern times. Today's

contemporary architecture will be the heritage of tomorrow.

Some buildings around the country that are considered his-

torically significant are relatively new and are considered

contemporary. The Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C. by

Eero Sarrinen and the Florida Southern Campus buildings

by Frank Lloyd Wright are good examples. It would be good

if we could make a statement in architecture about our present

lifestyle, and what better way is there than examples of

Pensacola-in-the-Seventies contemporary architecture, and

what better place for these buildings than in the Historic

District alongside other significant buildings from another


1. See page 12 of referenced material

Contemporary buildings in any historic district bring

forth an emotional response from almost anyone concerned.

Frequently the response is negative, but the issue does

need investigation by probing the problem in five areas

of importance. It is my hope to draw a conclusion based on

fact and subjective input. Within the summary I intend to

recap the facts shown, make suggestions as to what action

should be taken, and give some indication as to what action

should be taken, and give some indication as to what effect

the action will cause. In this manner I will be able to

state a clear case either for or against contemporary

buildings within the District. I don't feel that this

paper should be the last word, I only hope that it will stir

some controversy and thereby be a cause for further investi-

gation into the subject. If this investigative process can

be spurred on as a result of this paper then it will have

been a successful undertaking.


The area around Seville Square is a joyous place. A

visitor can step back in time 100 years by parking his car

and walking a few blocks. Within a few minutes walk is a

generous smattering of Pensacola architecture dating from

as early as 18042 up through the Civil War3 and into post

Civil War years of the Lumber Boom.4 An observer is con-

stantly stimulated by the variation of building type and

scale with which he is confronted.

For the most part the buildings around Seville Square

are residential in scale. Their construction normally of

wood painted of earth tones or white. Fancywork in wood

is not unusual in these buildings while at the same time

architectural expression as simple as a romanesque church

is also present. The buildings show a variety of influences.

The Barkley House5 (see photo #40), which is thought to be

the first masonry house built in Pensacola, seems to be

derived from the great townhouses of Charleston, South

Carolina with their raised main floor and their longitudinal

entry. The Axelson House6 (see photo #39), which is across

2. See item #39 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
3. See item #30 and #34 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
4. See item "25 and #28 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
5. See item #36 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
6. See item #37 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"

Zarragossa Street from the Barkley House, is a two story

wood lap siding house which brings to mind the moderately

affluent farmer's houses of North Florida and South Alabama

and Georgia of the late nineteenth century. The Dorr House7

(see phote #16) has the strong lines of a pre-Civil War

Greek Revival mansion but these lines are broken by the rich

Antebellum lumber boom Victorian design of detail. The half

hexagon bay window on the south elevation pleasantly breaks

with pure Greek Revival simplicity, and sets the house off

as "new rich" Victorian. The Moreno Cottage8 (see photo #19)

is a small architectural jewel with its simple body and its

much adorned entry and fascia. The scale of this tiny

building is very pleasing to the observer.

Although the majority of the historic buildings within

the District are residential, there are some commercial

structures that are notable and help set the character of

the District. Probably the most prominent building in the

Historic District is the old Christ Church9 (see photos

#17, 18) which faces onto Seville Square from the west.

This brick Romanesque Revival Church dates from 1832 and

stands as the Pennicle for the Historic District, and is

the symbol of Seville Square and old Pensacola.10 Three

7. See item #28 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
8. See item #25 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
9. See item #26 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"
10. See page #36 Comprehensive Historical Development Plan

blocks to the west and in a direct axis relationship to the

old Christ Church stands the Pensacola City Hall1 (see

photo #1). This building is the boldest piece of archi-

tecture in the District with its brick turrents acting

as a gateway to the Historic District from the west. It

is one of the newest historically significant buildings

within the District having been built in 1907. This

building is unique in the District in that it is the only

example of the Spanish Rococco style. In 1903 the Louisville

and Nashville Railroad built its Terminal Building12 (see

photos #7, 8) in Pensacola adjacent to the Docks. This

two story wood structure with perimeter balcony stood on

this location until 1969 when it was moved to its present

site on the south side of Seville Square near Pitts Slip.

The above buildings are in a developed area surround-

ing Seville Square. This area comprises about one-third

of the total District. To the north of Seville Square,

and still within the boundaries of the District, the fabric

of the architecture changes. Rather than the delightful

historic buildings, just discussed, the scene shifts to more

austere modern buildings such as the Police Station and

the Edwards Plumbing Company (see photo). Contrasting with

these buildings though, is St. Michael's elementary which

11. See item #17 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola" and page
#37 Comprehensive Historical Development Plan
12. See item #22 "Tour Guide of Historic Pensacola"

is listed on the National Register of Historic Places

(see photo #28). It is in this area where the Historic

District interfaces with the busy downtown area of Pensacola.

This part of the District is a contrast to the peaceful

setting around Seville Square.

To the east of Seville Square is a part of the Historic

District which is not on a tour map. This part of the Dis-

trict does have good examples of early Pensacola architec-

ture, but for the most part they are in a bad state of

repair (see photos #34, 35). It has been common practice

to pick these buildings up, intact, move them to another

part of the District and restore them (see photo #34). This

moving has left several vacant lots in the east portion of

the District along with other expanses of land which were

already vacant (see photos #30, 32).



Scattered throughout the Historic District are build-

ings that are of fairly recent construction (dating from the

1940's until the late 1950's). None of these buildings

have architectural significance, but they are within the

boundaries of the Historic District and must be dealt with

in some manner.

The best maintained and the most visually pleasing of

these buildings is the Pensacola Police Station (see photo

#28) which was built in the 1950's. Although this building

is not architecturally significant, it is historically sig-

nificant and should be maintained in its position within

the District. This red brick building was the first modern

police station and jail that Pensacola had, and it should

remain in order so that the visitors in the future may

compare police methods of the future with those of today.

As part of the police station complex there are several

outbuildings (see photo #29) which are used for storage and

crime lab functions. As soon as the proposed new police

station and jail are built, the outbuildings should be

either removed or torn down making way for other buildings

more important to the District.

One block south of the police station is the concrete

block box building of the G.W. Edwards Plumbing Company.

The building has neither architectural nor historic sig-

nificance, and it stands directly adjacent to the Quina

Apothocary Building which is significant. The plumbing

company building is an architectural eyesore; and should

be removed because it detracts from the importance and

prestige of the historic buildings around it; and breaks

the continuity of the east side of Alcaniz Street.

At the corner of Romana and 8th Street stands a small

masonry building (see photo #30) which was used as a paint

store and is now vacant. Although the building has no

architectural or historic significance it is a sound

building and could easily be remodeled and used for some

purpose. Unlike the Edwards Plumbing Company building

this former paint store building does not compete with any

historic structures for space or visual importance, and for

this reason it becomes a candidate for adaptive use. Be-

cause of the building's simplicity it would be inexpensive

to redesign the exterior to be in harmony with the Historic

District, and adapt it to some use which could serve Aragon

Court, (low rent housing) which is immediately across the

street. This could be the first step toward including the

population of Aragon Court in the planning of the District

rather than excluding them by building offices or medium

density high rent housing which is proposed for this area

of the District.13

The three buildings mentioned above are not the only

buildings in the Historic District without significance, but

13. See page 6, "Planning Board Subcommittee & Planning
Staff Report.

they represent the various problems brought about by

buildings that do not fit into the Historic District.

Each of these building types within the District presents

its own individual set of problems which must be dealt with

on an individual basis. The analysis that was used to

determine the fate of the three above buildings should be

a guide to help establish a methodology of determining

whether a building within the District should remain intact,

be completely removed or be remodeled and slated for adaptive



The Seville Square Historic District is only nine years

old. Much of that time was spent in actually planning

and setting up the District and renovating existing sig-

nificant buildings. Due to all this setting-up activity,

there has been very little new construction activity within

its boundaries. Since 1968 there have been only three new

construction projects; and fortunately, for the purposes

of this paper, the three construction projects are of varied

building categories, each of which is of extreme importance

to the concept of a Historic District. The three projects

are: A small contemporary office building for a Pensacola

architect, a new housing project that attempts to copy

Pensacola historic architectural styles, and a complete

reconstruction of a demolished historic structure.

In 1968 Carlton Noblin-Architect, looking for a quiet

area to build his new office, chose the corner of Government

Street and Florida Blanca Street. At that time, a year

before Seville Square Historic District came into being,

this was the perfect place for his office. It was a quiet,

residential area; but it was in the center of town and close

to the commercial amenities that any business office should

be close to. When Noblin was designing his building he felt

a sensitivity to the old houses which surrounded his property,

and since there were no guidelines or architectural review

committee at the time, he went about the task of designing

a small commercial building for an area primarily made up

of old wood houses, most of which were built prior to the

turn of the century. The result of his effort is a two

story brick office building, the second story of which is

concealed within the roof structure (see photo #38). The

building is obviously a contemporary office building, but

by the way Noblin handled the roof line and the front entry

the building fits into the neighborhood very well. The scale

of this building compared to its neighbors is very pleasing.

In talking with Noblin I found that he had some misgivings

about the use of brick as an exterior surfacing material

in an area that is predominately wood siding buildings. With

this feeling I must disagree for I find the use of brick an

excellent choice for this building in this setting. The use

of brick in contemporary office buildings in Pensacola is

very commonplace, and this is a contemporary office building.

The color of the brick was a good choice for the earth tone

brick color relates the building to the ground, a feeling

that is further emphasized by the overhanging, wood shingled

roof. This roof is one of the boldest architectural elements

of the building because of its proportion to the building and

goes the farthest toward relating the building with its

historically significant neighbors. The only criticism I

have of Noblin's office is the design of the four columns

of the front of the building. I feel that these columns are

not only too big for the building, but also out of scale for

the architecture of the District. A contemporary expression

of the slender wood column types used on the neighboring

historic buildings would have been more appropriate.

Since his office is the most recent contemporary building

within the District, I asked Carlton Noblin if he felt that

his building should set an example for other contemporary

buildings within the District. His answer was an emphatic

no. He stated that if he were trying to have the design

of his building approved today by the Architectural Review

Committee it would probably be turned down. Noblin feels

that there are too many conflicts between the design of his

building and the intent of the Architectural Review Committee

to allow, within the District, only that new construction

that is harmonious with the existing significant buildings.

Noblin feels that the two biggest problem areas of the accep-

tance of his building were the brick masonry exterior and the

asphaltic concrete drive and parking area behind the building.

Architect Ken Woolfe, a member of the Architectural Review

Committee, verified Noblin's feelings about the building not

being acceptable into the Historic District. Woolfe stated

that if the building were proposed today for construction

the Architectural Review Committee would probably turn it down.

I must disagree with Carlton Noblin and Ken Woolfe over

the use of the Noblin Architectural Office as a guide for

other contemporary buildings to be built within the District.

This building is a professional business office and traditionally

business offices and other commercial buildings of Pensacola

have been constructed of masonry. This is due to the fact

that masonry construction is more fire resistive than

other materials and also because brick has historically

been easy to obtain. Brick masonry construction is no

stranger to Pensacola during any era. The Barkley House,

which is right around the corner from Noblin's office, is of

slave-made brick construction that predates the nineteenth

century. The old Christ Church, which is the symbol of

the Historic District, is of brick construction and it

dates from 1832. The Pensacola City Hall, which was the

seat of municipal government from 1907 until 1978, is of

brick construction. These three buildings, all of which

are within the Historic District, set a precedent which

should not be ignored.

The asphaltic concrete drive and parking area behind

Noblin's office do not blend into the general harmonious

scheme of design with the Historic District, according to

Noblin. Although asphaltic concrete is not a handsome

paving material, I do find that it fits into the Historic

District since the city streets that lead to the drive are

of the same material. The Architectural Review Board for

the city of Mobile, Alabama Historic Districts agrees that

asphaltic concrete.driveways are acceptable.14

Carlton Noblin has done a commendable job of designing

a contemporary building that is in harmony with its historic

surroundings. For reasons stated, I believe this building

should be used as an example for the Architectural Review

14. Page 12, Material Standards for Mobile Historic Districts

Board to use in pointing out how contemporary design can

take place within the fixed environment of a historic dis-

trict, and fit in.

In the early 1970's the late Pat Dodson conceived an

idea to provide upper middle income housing within the

boundaries of the Historic District. His concept was that

the housing would be a mix of eclectic new houses and reno-

vated existing old houses. Before commissioning an

architect, Dodson researched the origin of the early

Pensacola house, for he felt that if the project was to have

any value it should be historically accurate. At the com-

pletion of this research he commissioned Hugh Leitch-Architect

to design three different house types for construction within

"The Intendent", the name Dodson gave the project. Leitch

assigned the design duties of the project to Bill Proctor,

a draftsman in his office who had a great deal of experience

in the design of such projects. The combination of Proctor's

talent and Dodson's research brought about three house types

that would be built within The Intendent (see photos #26,

41, 42, 43).

While the three houses all fall into the general vernacu-

lar of Gulf Coast architecture of the Pre-Civil War Era, they

do not all fall into the category of Pensacola Gulf Coast

architecture. The type "A" house is a three-story building

with exterior stair to the second floor which is the main

floor of the house. Entry to the third floor is via another

exterior stair, which is traditional in Pensacola architecture

around the middle of the nineteenth century. The upper two

floors are of wood frame while the ground floor is depressed

below grade which is the result of height and story limi-

tations of the zoning ordinance.15 The building as a whole

is not historically accurate although there are some archi-

tectural elements that are borrowed from Pensacola buildings

and the type "A" building has three expressed floors. There

is not a historically significant building in the District

that clearly expresses three individual floors. Normally

the third floor of Pensacola houses of the nineteenth century

are hidden within the roof structure and are expressed by
dormers. While there is historic precedent for the use

of a piano nobilel7 in the type "A" house, there is not a

precedent for the use of the lower floor as a living space,

furthermore there is no precedent which allows for stopping

the brickwork at the lower floor and continuing from there on

with wood siding.

The type "B" house is a two-story wood frame house with

center front entry flanked on each side by windows. The

second floor is concealed within the roof structure and is

expressed by three dormers which are placed symmetrically

in the front elevation. The first floor of the house is

raised off grade with brick piers. To the side of the

building is attached a smaller building which is a garage,

15. See HR-2 Zoning "Building Height Limit" Article III
"Historical Zoning" Pensacola Zoning Ordinance in the appendix
16. See photo of the Barkley House (photo #40).
17. In Italian Renaissance Palaces this is the principal floor
which is raised one story above the ground.

Discounting the garage, the type "B" house is an accurate

replica of a nineteenth century Pensacola house. A walk

through the Historic District will reveal several existing

historically significant houses with similar architectural

lines.18 My only objection to the type "B" house is the

three roof dormers which do not appear as original construc-

tion on Pensacola houses of this era.

The type "C" houses, by admission of Pat Dodson,

a replica of a New Orleans slave quarters. There is not

any single historic building in Pensacola that even dis-

tantly resembles it. The type "C" house may have borrowed

from authentic New Orleans architecture, but this has no

place in a Pensacola Historic District.

The original concept that Pat Dodson had for The

Intendent is good. While many architects may cringe at

the idea of trying to copy directly from the past in order

to provide housing in the Historic District I feel that it

is a worthy undertaking. The task of buying an historically

significant house and renovating it to a point where it is

suitable to live in is very expensive. It is not the type

of project the average Pensacola homeowner is willing to

undertake. Pat Dodson, by doing the work needed, hoped to

provide housing with an historic flavor to homeowners of

Pensacola. The goal of The Intendent had three parts:

first, Dodson wished to make a profit from real estate

speculation; second, Dodson and the Pensacola Preservation

18. See photos of Walton House #20, Lavelle House #24,
Quina House #14.

Board wished to pump new life into the Historic District

by encouraging middle income homeowners into the District;

and third, the project was the salvation for some old

Pensacola houses that otherwise would have been destroyed.

The three new building types were to be used to help fill

in between other older structures. If Pat Dodson had

modeled the type "A" and type "C" houses after Pensacola

residential architecture of the nineteenth century the

project would have been an architectural success rather

than a group of unrelated buildings.

In 1805 three Frenchman, Juan Baptiste Cazenave,

Pedro Bardevane, and Rene Chandiveneau built the Tivoli

High House with a ballroom, kitchen, and other outbuildings.

The High House was a two-and-a-half story building, the

ground floor was flush with the sidewalk and the upper

gallery extended over the sidewalk in European fashion.

On the ground floor a large room and several smaller rooms

were used for gambling. Later, when the High House was

acquired by Don Francisco Moreno, it was operated as a

boarding house and was dubbed Hotel Paree. The Spanish-

speaking Morenos still owned the house during the Civil

War and Union officers billeted there added a third name,

calling it the "Spanish Barracks". The Tivoli High House

was torn down during the 1930's.19

19. Tivoli House History taken from, Tour Guide Historic

In the early 1970's the Tivoli House site was ex-

cavated by archeologists in order to determine the precise

site of the original house, archeological data that would

be relevent to the reconstruction of the house, and data

relative to the interpretation of the house and-its

occupants with respect to their place in Pensacola's


After the archeological research was completed the

reconstruction of the new building was built on the same

site as the demolished original. The construction of the

new building is a concrete block lower floor with wood

frame upper floor construction. The new building is

similar in appearance to the original Tivoli High House,

the biggest difference being the construction of the

second floor balcony (see photos #21, 22, 44). Jim Moody,

who is the Director of the Historic Pensacola Preservation

Board, stated that extreme accuracy in the reconstruction

of this building was impossible due to the lack of adequate

research material to document the original building. A

great deal of guesswork went into this reconstruction.

The Tivoli High House is the only complete reconstruc-

tion of a historically significant building in the Historic

District. In addition, it is owned by the Preservation

Board and is the site of their offices. In this capacity

it is held as an example of what is expected within the

District. Due to its position as an example to developers

20. See letter from George G. Demmy to Lewis Brown dated
June 5, 1978.

of correct procedure within the Historic District, the

concept of the Tivoli High House reconstruction should

have been examined more closely before construction.

When a destroyed building is chosen for reconstruction

it must first be of extreme value either historically

or architecturally. The building to be reconstructed

must be extensively researched to the point of determina-

tion of the type fasteners that were used to hold the

building together, and the building must be reconstructed

using materials that are the same as original material

or at least as close to the same as modern technology will

allow. The Tivoli Reconstruction is the result of the po-
litical power of the late Pat Dodson.21 While the building

does have historic value to the City of Pensacola, there

are several other notable buildings existing within the

Historic District which could have been refurbished and used

in lieu of reconstruction. Political pull of one powerful

man is not justification for undertaking a reconstruction

project. The research that was done as part of the recon-

struction was partially good and partially not good. The

archeological work done at the site was professionally car-

ried out to determine the exact placement of the building

on the site and to obtain any other data that might be

important.22 From this point on the research was very

21. See letter from George Demmy to Lewis Brown dated 5 June, 1978.
22. See letter from George Demmy to Lewis Brown dated 5 June, 1978.

limited by the shortage of hard data on the building.

There were few photographs, and the ones that were avail-

able were taken in the late years of the building's life.

After questionable research the actual reconstruction

began. Over the existing foundations were built concrete

block walls to the height of the second floor. Over these

walls was placed stucco which was tooled to resemble large

blocks of stone. The tooling of stucco was not unusual to

Florida, and was used in St. Augustine.23 Although it is

not clear what the original wall material was; concrete block

was not available until the twentieth century. The second

floor balcony and the roof on the reconstruction are held

up by six wood posts placed symmetrically across the front

facade with the upper posts matching the lower posts in

detail. In the original building the posts were asymmetri-

cally placed with the second floor posts not aligning with

the ground floor posts. The posts of the original building

were not the same design from ground floor to second floor.

The second floor balcony of the original Tivoli High House

wrapped around the east side of the building to an exterior

stair. The balcony of the reconstruction terminates at each

side of the front facade, and there is no exterior stair.

As the Tivoli reconstruction stands it is not a true

reconstruction. It is a building that claims to be a recon-

struction of a past building, but upon casual examination

one can find several discrepancies between original and new.

23. See The Houses of St. Augustine by Albert Manucy,
Pages 70-71 (in the appendix)

As a historic reconstruction in a historic district, this

lack of attention is unforgivable.

The above three projects share one common aspect.

They are all new construction within the Historic District.

While they are all three different in concept they express

varying attitudes of construction within the District.

Carlton Noblin's office is a very good example of how con-

temporary architecture can "fit in" with the rigid con-

straints of a historic district and still produce a fine

building. The Intendent is a two fold object lesson. The

"B" house is an example of how new construction tuned to

architecture of the past can produce a building that is pleas-

ing visually and heighten awareness of historic structures

around it, while the "A" house and the "C" house are a

disrupting influence due to their lack of historic precedent

in the area. The Tivoli reconstruction is variable in that

it stands as an example of what not to do when attempting

architectural reconstruction.


Surrounding the Historic District are several features

that have an effect upon the planning of the District.

Some of the features, such as the new Judicial Complex, have

an impact upon the District, but the impact is not enough

to radically alter the fabric of the District. It is the

intent of this section to investigate those influences from

outside the District that will have or already have an im-

pact of magnitude on Seville Square.

Ten years ago the I-110 spur of Highway I-10 was begun.

The purpose of this spur is to unite the cross country

Highway 1-10 to U.S. Highway 98, which is Gregory Street in

Pensacola. The connection point between 1-10 and U.S.

98/Gregory Street is at the extreme north boundary of

St. Michael's Cemetary which is the northern most feature of

the Historic District. Although it is not yet complete,

the impact is already being felt within the District (see

photos #27, 36). Hugh Leitch, an architect who has done a

great deal of work in the District, presently is in the

process of moving a Victorian residence from the path of

the new expressway and situatingit.on a site opposite Seville

Square. It is Leitch's purpose to adapt the house for office
use. Without Leitch's concern the house would have been

24. See letter from Hugh Leitch to Lewis Brown dated
15 June 1978.

destroyed. In addition to the destruction caused by this

highway project, it also is disrupting visually and audibly

to visitors of St. Michael's Cemetary, which is on the

National Register of Historic Places. The Cemetary pro-

vides visitors with a pleasant stroll through Pensacola's

history via inscriptions on tombstones. The atmosphere of

the cemetery is quiet and serene with large oak trees

providing a protective canopy against invasion from the

Florida Gulf Coast sun. Against this background is the

I-110 spur, immediately adjacent to the cemetery, which

conducts high speed automobiles all day every day. The

constant distraction to a visitor of the cemetery can not

be avoided. In light of the bad points discussed there is

one major good point for the I-110 spur. At the terminus

of the highway there has been set aside a seven acre tract

of land that has been designated as a site for a motel.

This motel site is within walking distance of the Historic

District; and will encourage tourists into the District,

which will give the merchants an economic boost and en-
courage more investment in the Historic District.2 This

investment will be the lifeblood of significant buildings

in and around the District that otherwise would be lost.

On the south side of the District will run the new

Bayfront Parkway, which is presently under construction.

This parkway will route on the roadbed of existing Main

Street.(see photos 2, 34, 5, 6). The impact of the parkway

25. See illustration "A" and accompanying material on the I-110 spur.

upon the District has two bad points and one good one. Due

to the great traffic-carrying characteristic of the parkway,

it will act as a physical south boundary to the District,

thus detaching the L & N Terminal Building, which is on

the National Register of Historic Places, from the rest

of the District. It will also make pedestrian access to

the Bayfront Park, which is across the parkway from Seville

Square, extremely difficult. The second bad point is that

the new parkway, with its increased high-speed traffic

load, will damage the view of Pensacola Bay by interrupting

site lines from Seville Square with traffic. The good point

about the parkway is that it relieves the heart of the District.

Since the Historic District began, this Government Street

traffic artery has been a constant interrupter of the

serenity of the District. With the advent of the Bayfront

Parkway this crosstown traffic will be shifted three blocks

to the south, away from the heart of the District and toward

the south boundary of it.

Flanking the northeast corner of the Historic District

is a low rent housing project called Aragon Court (see photos

31, 33, 37) The project is mixed Black and White, with

Blacks being predominant. The consensus among Pensacola

planners is that in the next few years the residents of

Aragon Court will be displaced and the land reclaimed for

commercial use. This reclamation project is a very expen-

sive undertaking. Some estimates run as high as ten million

dollars; and in light of this one housing authority employee

stated that he thought the project would be as far as 10

to 20 years in the future if ever undertaken.

The Aragon Court, as it exists, presents a security

problem to the adjacent property owners of Seville Square.

People who have the money to invest in historic property are

slow to do so for fear of robbery, vandalism and other

security problems. The Pensacola police, whose station

is across the street from Aragon Court, state that Aragon

Court and the area around it have the highest crime rate

in the city.

In order for adequate development of the eastern part

of the Historic District to take place, the Aragon Court

problem must be dealt with. In the book Tight Spaces by

Richard Sommer, the author feels that beauty in building can

go a long way toward stopping the problems associated with

living conditions such as Aragon Court. With this idea it

would seem clear that the solution would be to develop the

east side of the District with "beautiful architecture",

and no one would dare spoil it with vandalism. Professor

Carl Feiss of the University of Florida's Graduate School

of Urban and Regional Planning disagrees with this idea.

Feiss claims that there are no clear cut solutions; and that

the erection of beautiful architecture has never, by itself,

solved such problems. History seems to agree with

Professor Feiss. For example, the Pruitt-Iago Housing

Development of St. Louis, Missouri was acclaimed in its

day as a major breakthrough in housing inner city poor

people, the same people that inhabit Aragon Court. The

architecture was handsome and project seemingly well

planned. Within a few years the housing project was nearly

all closed, and was methodically torn down as a result

of total failure.

This Pruitt-Iago Development acts as a graphic example

of what could happen if development of the eastern part of

the Historic District is not carefully planned to include the

desires, needs and wishes of the inhabitants of Aragon Court.

If these people are not included it could ruin the entire

Historic District by causing about half of it to sit in

abandonment and ruin. It is not very complementary statement

to the excellent job done with the District since its begin-

ning job done with the District since its beginning in 1969.


Whenever new construction is allowed in a historic

district there are always guidelines that are used to accept

or reject a proposed project. In some cases these guidelines

are clear-cut and are published in order that there be

little ambiguity in their interpretation. In other cases

they are not so clear. In the Seville Square Historic District

there are no published guidelines to direct a designer,

instead it is left to the interpretation of the individual

designer and the Architectural Review Board to determine

appropriate design based on historic buildings already in

the District. As an aid in determining how appropriate the

Seville Square design review system is it is necessary to

compare and contrast it with the guidelines used by two

other historic districts. These districts are Savannah, Georgia

and Mobile, Alabama. Each of these historic districts has

a different way in which they approach guidelines for new


Savannah, Georgia is a city that is rich in architectural

character. In 1966 the city began a general neighborhood

renewal study of a significant portion of the old Savannah

area. The result of the study was a historic preservation

plan that is felt by many preservationists to be the best of

its kind. The plan is in three parts. The first part is

an historic area analysis by a city planner. It is intended

that this section give local residents an insight into how

visitors view the historic area, and an examination of the

components that make up the area's character. The second

part sets up recommended criteria for development within

historic areas, particularly in relation to design standards

to assure that new construction and the rehabilitation and

relocation of existing structures are in keeping with the

surrounding environment. It is this particular portion of

the Preservation Plan that has gained such fame among

preservationists.26 Within part two are demonstrated

sixteen characteristics of architectural relatedness with

each one being assigned a point value of one. In order that

new or renovated construction be accepted into the District

it must achieve an evaluation rating of at least six of these

points. The advent of these design criteria have allowed

for the successful insertion of contemporary design into the

fixed environment of the Historic District. The third section

makes specific recommendations based on observed problems,

knowledge of rehabilitation and restoration programs, and

professional experience.

The city of Mobile, Alabama uses a guide which is much

simpler for the designer to use, but is just as stringent

in concept. Rather than setting up specific proportion,

rhythms and scales, the Mobile guidelines deal with materials

in an acceptable/not acceptable manner.27 In addition the

guidelines deal with scale, materials, details, elements,

roofs and grounds in a general fashion outlining what should

be expected of a designer, but not putting extreme restrictions

26. See "Historic Preservation Plan for Savannah, Georgia, "
in the appendix.
27. See Material Standards for Mobile Historic Districts,
in the appendix.

on him. It is not the intention of these guidelines to

produce new architecture that duplicates past styles, but

to bring about a harmony where all buildings in the Historic

District add to the beauty of the area.

Pensacola's Seville Square Historic District has no

published guidelines to aid a designer. All proposals for

new or renovated construction within the District must be

submitted to the Architectural Review Board which is made

up of seven citizens, two of which must be architects and

members of the American Institute of Architects. This

Review Board has the final approval of the project, and

rejection by it has never been challenged. Since the

District will grow and the need for more new construction

will become mandatory soon, it is necessary that a more

clear-cut method of determining the acceptability of new

construction be implemented.

Unlike the ordered rhythm of the architecture of

Savannah, the notable buildings of Seville Square vary in

scale, texture, color and other factors that influence

design. In Savannah it is possible to insert a contemporary

building between two historically significant buildings

and have each of the three complement the others as long as

the new building adheres to the rules of order set by its

adjacent neighbors. In some cases this would be possible

in Seville Square, but in most cases it would not. For this

reason it should become mandatory that anyone planning a new

structure in the Historic District should have to present

his project to the board with extensive photographs of

neighboring property so that the board may determine the

ultimate impact of the new construction.

The Material Guidelines of the City of Mobile, Alabama

is a good model for Seville Square to use in developing

guidelines. The varying scales and fabrics of the individual

buildings in the Seville Square Historic District make it

impossible to implement guidelines similar to Savannah's.

As mentioned in another section, Carlton Noblin's archi-

tectural office is a good example of how contemporary archi-

tecture can fit into Seville Square. The criteria that make

Noblin's office good design are the same as Mobile's criteria.

In the eastern part of the Historic District is an area

that is, for the most part, vacant land. Eventually this

part of the District will be developed. Before that begins

it is important that the Historic Preservation Board review

the area carefully and determine how it should be built-up.

At present there is a study being made to determine if the

area is suitable for new townhouses. If these townhouses

are built, the Preservation Board feels that the design

concerns will be along the usual scale, color, texture, etc.28

This method of determining design restrictions is unacceptable.

28. See letter from George Demmy to Lewis Brown dated
5 June, 1978.

In the District there is no "usual" scale, color or texture.

The evidence of this is discussed in the "Fabric of the

District" part of this paper.

The eastern part of the District offers a design

challenge that few other Historic Districts ever encounter.

This mass of vacant land offers an opportunity to mix old

and new buildings in such a manner that comparison and con-

trast between them cannot be avoided. As discussed in the

introduction of this paper, this is a very worthwhile goal.

Allowing the construction of contemporary buildings in the

eastern part of the District does not lessen the importance

of design guidelines. A special set of design restrictions

should be imposed on this particular area. These restrictions

should limit the scale of new construction to be in harmony

with an "average" scale of historically notable buildings

in the District. A materials restriction should also be

imposed in order that only materials common to contemporary

Pensacola construction be allowed. These rules would serve

to allow for ready comparison of old and new, and future

generations would have a collection of buildings in one

group that would be cross section of Pensacola Architecture

in the last quarter of the twentieth century.


The placing of contemporary architecture within the

boundaries of the Seville Square Historic District is

necessary to bring about the success of the District.

The introduction of this paper dealt with the need for con-

temporary design to be placed within close proximity of

the historic buildings in order that an observer could

easily make a comparison between old and new. In order

for this concept to work it is necessary for the new

architecture to be comparable with the old.

Scale is a term that is used to designate a building's

relationship to its environment. Frequently architects

will speak of a building's scale in terms of how it relates

to man. Normally a building in scale with man will have

architectural elements that a single human being can feel

enclosed by as an individual. With few exceptions the

buildings of the Historic District are to the scale of man.

This being the case it is necessary that new buildings

in the District maintain this same scale. Violations of this

rule would result in the gradual loss of identity of the

District as a whole, and eventually the Historic District

would be reclaimed by the architecture of downtown Pensacola.

The texture of a building is a quality unique to each

building. A building's texture is how it "feels" visually.

The Century Bank in downtown Pensacola, with its crisp white

skin, visually feels slick and smooth while in actuality the

precast panels that make up the exterior skin are rough

to the touch. The wood lap siding that is used on many

of the houses in the Historic District gives the visual

impression of being a rough surface while in actuality

each board is smooth to the touch. In some cases when

buildings are grouped together there is a texture harmony

that is expressed. In areas of the District where these

patterns are set, new construction should reflect the

texture of surrounding architecture.

Along the many streetscapes of the Historic District

there emerges a rhythm set up by the repetition of archi-

tectural elements from building to building. These ele-

ments might be whole building facades or they might be the

individual elements of each building such as windows or doors

or individual members of a balcony rail. When this rhythm

is broken the effect can sometimes be disastrous. A break

in the architectural rhythm along Government Street between

Adams Street and Florida Blanca Street would cause degrada-

tion of each individual building much the same way that a

sour violin note can ruin an entire musical movement.

Architectural rhythm is an important element to be considered

when additions to existing buildings or architectural infill

is being considered.

These three elements; scale, texture, and rhythm are

the basis for architectural compatability. It is essential

that the importance of these elements be emphasized in all new

construction. Failure to recognize these will result in

complete loss of continuity around buildings in the District.

As discussed in another part of this paper, great

changes are taking place around the perimeter of the

District. The I-110 spur and the Bayfront Parkway will

bring a great deal of traffic in the vicinity of the His-

toric District. This traffic generation is attractive

to merchants and the merchants will want to develop property

for business. This is good since it will create an ever

stronger economic base for the District to grow. Since

there is a limited number of historically notable buildings

available in and around the Historic District and a limited

number of merchants willing to invest the time and money

necessary for preservation and the need for an economic

backbone exists, the solution is obvious. Allow for con-

trolled contemporary architecture to be built in the District

to fill the need for the new influx of commercial uses.

It will seem to some people that the solution would be to

allow for new construction that copies historic Pensacola

architecture. At first glance this might seem to be a viable

solution, but experience has shown that it will not work.

The Tivoli House is supposed to be a reconstruction of the

original Tivoli House, but too many liberties were taken

during design; and the building as an accurate reconstruction

is a failure. The Intendent Project by Pat Dodson is another

example of the extreme liberties taken when new construction

tries to copy old. The Historic District is not a place like

Disneyland where modern copies of old buildings are acceptable

since every visitor knows that he is surrounded by make believe.

Architectural accuracy is essential in Seville Square for that

is the whole reason for the Historic District, a museum where

examples of historically significant architecture can be

allowed to flourish without fear of destruction or intrusion.

For this reason projects which try to copy historic archi-

tecture cannot be acceptable.

As the Historic District ages and future generations

begin to appreciate what was done there it will be important

that these people of the future recognize the role that

Pensacola architecture of the seventies played in the de-

velopment of the city. This idea is a direct outgrowth of

the concept of comparing old and new. A visitor to the

Historic District in the year 2078 should be able to com-

pare and contrast the Christ Church, build in 1832, with its

handmade brick bearing wall structural system and wood truss

roof system with a 1970's Pensacola church of similar scale

built in the Historic District. A contemporary church would

probably have a structural steel structural system with

brick used as a non-structural skin. This same visitor

would quickly note the difference between the handmade brick

of the Christ Church and the manufactured brick used in the

1970's church. This is only one example, but it is to the

point. Controlled building of contemporary architecture

within the District will allow for the constant growth of the

District in a manner that will continuously allow for com-

parisons between old and new.

Since the need for contemporary architecture has been

established for the Historic District, is is necessary that

a definate plan of action be implemented. There are three

stages that the plan of action must go through in sequence

if the concept is to be a success. The three stages are

one: setting up of definate planning goals for the District,

two: make an in depth survey of the existing architecture

of the District, and three: set up a definate method of

new project submittal.

Definate planning goals are very important to the life

of Seville Square. There has been some thought toward future

goals, but no definate goals have been set. The only land

planning that has been done is the historic zoning that now

exists. The zoning is broken into three parts; two residential

zones and one commercial zone. While this was a good start it

is time to reevaluate this system and make changes. If the

District is going to allow new construction it must assume

the responsibility of telling developers exactly how to proceed.

Generalized zoning as it exists can not do this. Planning

restrictions must be implemented on a block by block basis,

and in some cases a lot by lot basis. This type planning

will put complete control of the District in the hands of the

Architectural Review Board which will act with advice from

the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board. This pinpoint

planning can be used to encourage new building types into

the District which will be of value for comparison purposes.

One building type that should be encouraged is religious

building. The only building of this type in the District

is Christ Church which is 146 years old. It is necessary

that another church of this scale be introduced into the

District. With Aragon Court bordering the Historic

District to the north and east it is imperative that the

District recognize the existence of this project rather

than turn its back, which it is now doing and plans to

keep on doing. Social services and governmental agencies

that deal with the residents of Aragon Court should be

encouraged into the east part of the District to serve its

neighbors to the north. By admitting that Aragon Court

exists and attempting to deal with its problems there is

a hope that the security problem associated with it may

be lessened.

While the setting up of planning goals is important

it is just as important to set up a timetable to go along

with them. This timetable is used to determine if the

development of the District is on schedule; and if not,

it will give district planners a chance to determine why

not. This timetable should be loose enough to allow for

changes, but tight enough to keep planning goals on schedule.

The goals should be set up with three parts: immediate

goals on a year to year basis; intermediate goals which

occur every five to seven years; and long range goals,

fifteen to twenty years from now.

A survey of buildings existing in the District is a

project which the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board

is actively working on. The value of this survey can

not be understated since it will be used in the planning

of the District and the design of guidelines for new

construction. In any museum it is important to take

inventory, and in the case of Seville Square Historic

District, a detailed inventory is what the survey is.

Upon completion of the survey of the District, the

Preservation Board and the Architectural Review Board

should join efforts to set up a method of submittal and

review for new projects within the District. Step one will

be to publish a manual for preservationsits who will be

dealing with historic properties. Presently there are

as many interpretations of what is genuine Pensacola

design as there are interpreters. This manual of preservation

should be authored by a joint effort between a preservation

architect and an historian. The work would deal with the

history of Pensacola relating to its architecture; and

would parallel political, sociological and other historic

facts with the development of architectural examples. This

part of the preservation manual would be the responsibility

of the historian. The architect would deal with the buildings

themselves. He would describe the various building types

and explain the systems, materials and methods used in

construction. This jointly prepared preservation manual

should begin with the earliest known examples of Pensacola

and come forward to the present day. As necessary this

manual should be reviewed and brought up to date. The

book should be used as a point of beginning for people who

wish to restore historic buildings, make additions to his-

toric buildings, or build new buildings within the District.

The preservation manual would be used as a common spring-

board for discussion of appropriate design for the Historic


As a. continuation of the preservation manual, a published

set of architectural guidelines should be adopted in order

that architects designing buildings for the Historic Dis-

trict will have a clear understanding of what will be ac-

ceptable by the Architectural Review Board at the time of

project evaluation. Due to the complex nature of the

Seville Square Historic District it will be necessary to

design two sets of guidelines. The first set will deal

with new construction in the east part of the District.

As discussed earlier, this part of the District is for the

most part vacant land. New construction in this part of

the District would be of contemporary design and would,

for the most part, be single, freestanding buildings.

Guidelines for this part of the District would control

scale, rhythm, landscaping and materials in such a. way

that the contemporary architecture that would result would

be harmonious with the historic architecture that exists

a few blocks away. The Historic Preservation Plan of

Savannah, Georgia should be used as a guide to the

development of this guideline. The second part of the

published guidelines would deal with additions to historic

buildings and architectural infill between historic buildings.

Due to the difference in scale, age texture and other design

features between historic properties grouped in the Seville

Square area, each building project in this area should be

controlled by guidelines that deal with the use of archi-

tectural materials. If a project is proposed for a site

that is between two properties of different scale or texture,

it is difficult to relate to one without offending the other.

In this case the new building would assume an identity of

its own, restricted only in material usage. The material

guidelines set up by the city of Mobile,Alabama should act

as a guide for the design of Seville Square's material


All building projects in this Historic District should

continue to be submitted to the Architectural Review Board

for approval. In the future, all requests for building

approval should be accompanied by a model of the project,

a rendering or other graphic aids which will relate the

proposed project to all its neighbors in terms of scale,

texture, color and materials. The board would either approve

or disapprove the project based on adherence to published

guidelines and compatibility with surrounding architecture.

If a project were disapproved, the board would be compelled

to give specific reasons why so the owner could make the

necessary changes and re-submit his project.

Throughout the course of this thesis the reader will

note that I have done much criticism. This criticism is

used to point out areas of weakness I have detected in the

Historic District. It is my hope that by pointing out

weakness, I can encourage other persons with sensitivity to

the Seville Square Historic District to act and make the

Historic District an even better place. This spurring

of others into action was one of the main reasons for this

paper. I am aware that many decisions made within-the District

have been made from expediency, and in general were the best

directions under a particular set of circumstances. It

is my honest opinion that the Historic Pensacola Preservation

Board, the Architectural Review Board and the citizens of

Pensacola have done a commendable job with Seville Square

Historic District.



1. Pensacola City Hall, West Elevation, built 1907.

2. Looking West down Main Street from Adams Street.

3. Looking East down Main Street from Adams Street.

4. Looking North across Main Street from Barracks Street.

5. Looking South to Pitt's Slip from Main Street

6. Looking South Across Pensacola Bay from Main Street.

7. L & N Terminal building, North elevation, built 1903.

8. L & N Terminal building, West elevation, built 1903.

9. Lee House, West elevation, built 1866.

10. Looking West across Seville Square from Alcaniz Street, Christ Church
in background.

11. Looking Southwest across Seville Square from corner of Alcaniz Street
and Government Street.

12. Smith House, West elevation, built 1870's.

13. St. Michael's Creole Benevolent Association meeting hall, South elevation
built 1895-96.

14. Quina House, West elevation, built about 1910.

15. Looking Southeast across Seville Square from corner of Government Street
and Adams Street.

16. Dorr House, East elevation, built 1871.

17. Christ Church, from Southeast, built 1832.

18. Same as 17.

19. Moreno Cottage, North elevation, built 1879.

20. Dorothy Walton House, from Northwest, built-unsure.

21. Tivoli House reconstruction, from Northeast, built 1976.

22. Tivoli House reconstruction, from North west, built 1976.

23. Julee Cottage, from Southwest, built about 1970.

24. Lavalle House, from Northwest, built about 1810.

25. Christ Church, from Northwest, built 1832.

26. The "Intendent", type "C" house, built 1975.

27. Looking North up Alcaniz Street toward St. Michael's Cemetary and
I-110 Spur.

28. Looking South down Alcaniz Street toward Police Station and G. W.
Edwards Plumbing Company.

29. Looking North from corner of Romana Street and Florida Blanca Street.

30. Looking West down Romana Street from 8th Street.

31. Aragon Court from corner of 8th Street and Romana Street.

32. Looking Southeast from corner of 8th Street and Romana Street.

33. Looking North up 8th Street from Intendencia Street.

34. Looking West down Intendencia Street from Florida Blanca Street.

35. Looking North up Florida Blanca Street from Intendencia Street.

36. North boundary of St. Michael's Cemetary, Chase Street in foreground.

37. Aragon Court Northwest boundary corner of Chase Street and Florida
Blanca Street.

38. Office of Carlton Noblin, Architect, Government Street at Florida
Blanca Street, Built 1968.

39. Axelson House, from Southwest, built 1892.

40. Barkley House, from Northwest, built about 1815.

41. The Intendent, Type "A" house.

42. The Intendent, Type "B" house.

43. The Intendent, Type "C" house.

I 1~Sk

-- `"
a ~,


11 r
iT .,-* t la ~ t '
tlSyC- "*^ 1? '

---- ~

)--- -;~-- ~ ~1~91(
~zr~--\ ,~



.2 '~.




-----~C~c~ ,,,~.,





i 1/ 1


4' -t A

i... MA --------

T- -I

fT7-r 'A

S ;.. r.i,"h~~fFP

-,~---- F.~r,

- 2 f.* ^ ^^: -^:w-.< '^.'' -*. -" .
.^ ^ ,a:/ :.- **.- .- .^
f. .-.-/-

"-' `' ~U-~V


~~Ld~~-* ~i
`~~`?Zc~ '-

--- I

; vs
L. j WW I,


:ITM, 41'K
ME- .
114 e

'1:.5 5iT- Y

-' ''~'4....z

S -





. L


* .9or


S~~ ~

. .


..'? .4
'.t. I.Y4'* i

1-' .

* ....,r -.
*.~ g; 4. '1 -.;-



I -': -'"" 1. -f .1. :
'' 5=..,,. '-.:'~1:
C. -r ~~''''''
~c '~I-., .
'- ''~~'
r '- )
'." i .." C '':'
:~ -. ;:;
~' ~' '. :.;'.`
.. .-;:1 .


SECRETAR SMATS Historic Pensacola


205 E. ZARAGOZA ST. PENSACOLA, FLORIDA 32501 AC 904 434-1042

June 5, 1978

Mr. Lewis Brown, Jr.
Residential Designer and Planner
1212 Northwest 12th Avenue
Gainesville, Florida 32601

Dear Mr. Brown:

Jim Moody has asked me to respond to your letter of May 27 in which
you requested clarification of the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board's
role in the matter of design and construction in the Seville Square Historic
District. Architectural controls were vested in an Architectural Review
Board established by city ordinance in 1968. This group consists of seven
citizens, two of which must be architects and members of the AIA. The
Historic Pensacola Preservation Board's role is an advisory one only, with
the direct responsibility for advice vested in my position as Chief of the
Bureau of Architecture and Construction. The Historic Pensacola Preservation
Board's official role, therefore, is that of a concerned observer.

With respect to new construction in the district, I feel the Board's
position would be to support contemporary proposals that displayed respect
for the historic character of the area the well known concerns for:
scale, color, texture, fenestration patterns, corniceheights, etc., etc.

As far as the Tivoli House is concerned, I must point out to you that
the entire site was professionally excavated prior to construction to
establish: (1) the precise site of the original house; (2) archaeological
data that would be relevant to the reconstruction of the house; and, (3)
data relative to the interpretation of the house and its occupants with
respect to their place in Pensacola's history.

Your question concerning the "why" of the Tivoli House identifies
a "fact of life" concerning architecture and an area rarely, if ever,
discussed in the course of academic training. I am referring to the role
of politics in the architectural process. You should be aware of the
premiere role the late Pat Dodson played in establishing this district and
the plans for the general direction of its growth. An avid historian, Pat
had his own ideas about the significance of the Tivoli House and adjacent
ballroom, which was a social center of the early community. This project
was a pet of his and its execution, the result of his drive and influence.

The Allen/Watson plan for the Pitts Slip area is in reality Steve
Watson's thesis project. It is both dynamic and attractive and would be
an asset to this area were it built. The area that it was proposed for,
however, represented the district's only large open area on the Bay, a fact
recognized on the 1971 Bateman Master Plan for the district and when an

Mr. Lewis Brown, Jr.
Page 2
June 5, 1978

acquisition grant became available in 1976, the Board developed the plan
whereby the property was finally secured. A requirement of the grant is
that the land be committed to open space, therefore, a discussion of
development on it is moot.

With respect to the vacant land in the east part of the District, this
Board is studying a proposed zoning change which would allow for the
construction of town houses. Again, I believe their design concerns will
be along the usual scale, color, texture, etc., guidelines.

The question of non-conforming buildings is a very difficult one to
respond to briefly. The fact that we call them non-conforming and you
call them "contemporary" identifies a different philosophical outlook.
There is no doubt that these buildings are products of their time. The
problem is that their time is 50-100 years in advance of the period that
produced the distinct area of our concern and while the Board, I feel,
has no problem with the concept of architecture of and in its time, I
believe their policy would follow the general concept of modification of
non-conforming structures to reduce the impact of their appearance and/or
their demolition, a course of action established in the zoning ordinance
of the City of Pensacola. The latter law I suspect will probably never
be enforced; however, its existence on the books does represent a position
supported by this organization.

In regard to your question about the Board's goals for the District,
I would say that beyond the expected preservation and restoration of the
area's architecture, that we are striving to establish the District as a
viable residential neighborhood including a healthy representation of
commercial and office usages. As you know, the latter activities are
growing steadily while our residential efforts still lag.

I trust this information meets your needs and if I can be of further
service, please contact me. You have chosen an are of architecture that
is growing in interest and debate. I look forward t~' your work.


George G. Demmy
Restoration Director


PENSACOLA, FLORIDA 32502 904/432-6196

15 June 1978

Mr. Lewis Brown, Jr.
1212 Northwest 12th Avenue
Gainesville, FL 32601

Dear Lewis:

In keeping with your recent request that we provide you with some
information as to our involvement in restoration in Pensacola's
Historic District, I am setting out below a few thoughts as to our
experience to date.

As you may recall, we worked closely with Pat Dodson who was a pioneer
in preserving and restoring historic buildings in the District here in
Pensacola. Our work with him, in addition to assisting in the
restoration of a number of individual buildings in our District, was
the development of the drawings and specifications for a large scale
project known as The Intendent. This project, if realized, would have
resulted in restoration and reconstruction of a number of similar
residences on a square block in the heart of Pensacola's Historical
District bounded by Alcaniz, Intendencia, Tarragona and Romana Streets.
Additionally, the development projected restorations on the south side
of Intendencia Street which would have resulted in a street-scene of
directed and well-designed organization. Unfortunately, due to Mr.
Dodson's untimely death, the project did not become a reality in the
spirit in which it was designed. Although Dodson's son has purportedly
taken over the Project, the original scheme has been abandoned entirely
and the development of Intendencia Street, while not unpleasant, is not
at all what was projected in our design. Buildings now in place along
this block on Intendencia Street are of disparate vintage and
historical value and in contrast to the original design, which would
have resulted in a very attractive residential neighborhood, include a
mix which is primarily commercial (offices and shops) interspersed with
a few remaining residences. Our role in the project as envisioned by
Pat Dodson was planner and architect, and our contribution to the
project, if it had been realized, would have been considerable in those

As you know, we have located our office in a restored building of 1860

vintage. This was a typical Gulf Coast cottage and our work in
restoring it required the removal of some portions of the structure
which were added (considerably later than the original construction)
and were of considerably less quality as to materials and workmanship.
We replaced these removed portions with new area which closely
resembles the original construction and, we believe, ties together to
present a creditable result. You may be aware that we were awarded an
Honor Award by our Chapter of AIA for this effort. We have also
participated in the restoration of individual buildings around the
District, including a large project we are now working on. This is a
Victorian residence which was endangered by the construction of the
terminus of I-110 in Downtown Pensacola and was, therefore, moved
several blocks to a vacant site in the heart of the District,
immediately opposite Seville Square. The restoration of this project,
a two-story building of about 1,900 sq. ft. on each floor, is partially
complete. We intend to make it available for lease for office usage
and we are now considering moving our office into a portion of this
building thereby making our present building available for lease or

We have been involved to some degree in the restoration of about a
dozen buildings in the District, not including the several dozen
buildings designed to be a part of The Intendent development. We find
the work to have considerable appeal, although due to the scale of each
individual project, not especially rewarding from a return point of
view. Our experience working with the Architectural Review Board for
the City of Pensacola has been very pleasant. We find that this Board
generally agrees with our approach to the restoration processes. We
have also found that the Inspection Department of the City of Pensacola
has been very cooperative in that they have not insisted on complete
compliance with the Code in all matters, especially those where such
compliance would degrade the original design of the building as in
stairways, etc. Possibly due to our experience, we have fewer problems
with approvals than other persons engaged in restoration or adaptive
modification work. However, our rapport with both the Architectural
Review Board and the City of Pensacola Building and Inspection
Departments has been outstanding and has, we believe, allowed for
results which would not have been possible without this favorable

More constraints relating to Architectural detailing would, we believe,
be in order. For example, some buildings have been allowed to be
restored using asphalt shingle roofs, poorly detailed railings, and

other inappropriate or non-representative features. There must,
however, always be compromise between authenticity (and resulting
higher costs) and financial feasibility to assure a reasonable return
on investment. In general, it appears that this return is attractive
in the District at the present time. Values continue to increase and,
as a result, the atmosphere of the District is enhanced. For example,
one recent sale of a one and one-half story frame building of 2,800
square feet on a lot with an area of 9,257 square feet sold for

I hope the above may be of some use to you in your work. If you have
any specific questions that I have failed to answer, please give me a
call and I will try to help further.

Take this free tour

in your automobile.

This self-guided tour. which you can take in your own automobile.
is provided to the public without charge and is sponsored by the
Pensacola-Escambia Development Commission. Simply follow
the route marked in orange on the map to the right. Signs, as
shown in the inset here. will help you stay on the route.
Cervantes Sts.. bit. 1915)-Stop here
TOUR and receive free brochures and
directions for area tours and local attrac-
tions. The offices of the Pensacola-
Escambia Development Commission are
open weekdays from 8 AM until 5 PM.
and Saturday from 9 AM to 5 PM.
PALAFOX STREET-In the 1770s the
British named this street George Street.
and later the Spanish changed the name
to Palafox Street in honor of General
Josd de Palafox y Melzi. who defended
Zaragoza. Spain, in the Peninsular War (1808-1814).
CERVANTES STREET-Pensacolians in the late 19th century
named this street in honor of Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra (1547-
1616). whose best-known work is Don Quixote.
2. LEE SQUARE (Palafox & Gadsden Sts.)-Previously known
as Florida Square. this park in 1891 was renamed Lee Square and
dedicated as Pensacola's tribute to the Confederacy. The 50-foot
high monument was modeled after Egan's painting. "After Ap-
pomattox" and is a duplicate of the figure standing in Alexandria.
GADSDEN STREET-Named for James Gadsden. a lieutenant
under Andrew Jackson in the War of 1812 who later served as
minister to Mexico and negotiated the Gadsden Purchase.
JACKSON STREET-Named in honor of President Andrew
Jackson, who as an American general, took Pensacola by force
from the Spanish in 1811 and again in 1818 and by treaty in 1821.
3. SITE OF FORT GEORGE (NW corner of Palafox & LaRua Sts.,
bit. 1770s) -The British constructed the fort that stood on this site
in the 1770s: in 1781 a significant Revolutionary War battle was
fought here when Spanish troops under Bernardo de Galvez oust-
ed the British and took possession of the Province of West Florida.
Listed in the National Register of Historic Places
LA RUA STREET-Named after a Spanish family, residents of
Pensacola since the early 1800s.
BELMONT STREET-A New Yorker who invested in Pensacola
in the 1830s is believed to have named this street for an area near
New York City.
4. EDWARD A. PERRY HOUSE (NE corner of Palafox & Wright
Sts.. bit. 1867- 82) -Charles E. Boysen. Swedish Consul to Pensa
cola. began this house, and it was completed by Edward A. Perry.
Confederate general and Governor of Florida. The Scottish Rite
now owns the building.
5. CHRIST CHURCH (NW corner of Palafox & Wright Sts.. bit.
1902)-This unusual Episcopal church is built in Spanish Baroque
architectural style.
WRIGHT STREET- Named for Benjamin Drake Wright. who was
prominent in local and state affairs from the 1820s until the 1860s.
GREGORY STREET-Named for Walter Gregory. president of
the first chartered territorial bank.
6. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE (NE corner of Palafox &
Chase Sts.. bit. 1939)-Except for a break during the Civil War.
the United States Postal Service has served Pensacola continuously
since 1823. This building reflects Pensacola's Spanish heritage.
CHASE STREET-Named for Col. William H. Chase. who de
signed and built most of the forts at the mouth of Pensacola Bay.
7. ST. MICHAEL'S CHURCH (SW corner of Palafox & Chase
Sts.. bit 1885)-This Catholic church, the oldest of its denomina-
tion in Pensacola. was originally established under the Spanish in
1781 near City Hall.

8. SAN CARLOS HOTEL (NW corner of Palafox & Garden Sts..
bit. 1910)-This local landmark was the center of the citv's business
and social life for more than half a century
GARDEN STREET-The Spanish ,iter 1781 named this street
Calle de Jardines or Street of Gardens because garden plots. that
matched house lots in the Old City area around Seville Square.
lined the north side of the street. Earlier the British had called this
Grafton Street.
ROMANA STREET-The British called this Prince's Street: the
Spanish renamed it Calle de la Romana.
fox and Intendencia Sts.)-In 1821 General Andrew Jackson. first
Territorial Governor of Florida. and his wife. Rachel. occupied the
residence that previously stood on this corner.
INTENDENCIA STREET-This street had two names during the
British period: west of the stockade it was called Granby Street
and east of the stockade it was Harcourt Street. The Spanish re-
named the street Calle de la Intendencia for the Intendent or roval
fox & Government Sts.. bit. 1883)-Built on the old Customs
House site. this French Renaissance Revival structure was originally
intended as a Post Office.
11. PLAZA FERDINAND VII (Palafox at Government & Zara-
goza Sts.)-This plaza, named for Spanish King Ferdinand VII.
served as the center of Spanish community life and public cere-
mony. Here Andrew Jackson received Florida from Spain in
1821. The monument honors W. D. Chipley. who connected Pen-
sacola to the East by rail.
12. BEAR BUILDING (404 South Palafox St.. bit. 1892)-This
building is an excellent example of late 19th century commercial
architecture. The second floor exhibits cast iron filigree work.
MAIN STREET-Originally the shoreline of the Bay ran along
Main Street. All property south is "made land." consisting of ballast
from sailing vessels from around the world during the 19th and
early 20th centuries.
13. McKENZIE-OERTING COMPANY (601 South Palafox
St.. opened here 1888)-This ship's chandlery or mariner's supply
company served Pensacola's fishermen and sailors from 1868
until 1971. Until 1966 schooners which fished off the Yucatan
Peninsula of Mexico berthed at the rear.
14. BUCCANEER (moored at Municipal Pier, bit. 1910)-This
two-masted, knock-about Gloucester schooner, originally named
the VIRGINIA. was constructed in Essex. Mass., in 1910. She is
one of the few remaining vessels once used in the snapper fishing
industry in this region from 1890-1965. Restoration is now in prog-
ress by the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board. Open to visi-
tors on a seasonal basis. Listed in the National Register of His-
toric Places.
15. MUNICIPAL AUDITORIUM (bit. 1951)-The Auditorium is
the scene of many concerts, plays. dances, conventions, and other
special events.
16. PENSACOLA ART CENTER (NW corner of Jefferson &
Main Sts.. bit. 1906)-Used as a jail until 1954. this building now
houses the Pensacola Art Center. Open Tuesday through Satur-
day. from 9 AM to 5 PM: Sunday from 2-5 PM: and closed Monday.
JEFFERSON STREET-Named for Thomas Jefferson. third
president of the United States (1801-1809).
17. PENSACOLA CITY HALL (NE corner of Jefferson & Zara-
goza Sts.. bit. 1907)-This structure is Spanish Baroque style.
18. SITE OF THE OPERA HOUSE (SE corner of Jefferson &
Government Sts.. bit. 1883)-D. F. Sullivan. a local lumber mag-
nate. built Pensacola's Opera House during the lumber boom of
the late 19th century. The building was demolished in 1917 after
being damaged by a hurricane.
GOVERNMENT STREET-Under the British this was Pitt Street
at the west end of the stockade and Bute Street at the east end.
19. SEVILLE QUARTER (130 East Government St.. bit. 1870s)-
Now a period entertainment center, the structure housing "Rosie
O'Gradv s Warehouse was originally a hotel and later a tobacco
TARRAGONA STREET-Named for the town of Tarragona in
Catalonia. Spain.

At this point we suggest

you begin a walking tour.

The Walking Tour of the Seville Square Historical District is spon-
sored by the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board.
ZARAGOZA STREET-Named after Zaragoza (Zaragossa).
Spain. the city which repulsed the attack of Napoleon in the Penin-
sular War (1808-1814). Although locally the name is spelled Zarra-
gossa. properly it should be spelled Zaragoza.
HISTORY (Tarragona & Zarragossa Sts.) See full sketch on other
side of this folder.
21. TRANSPORTATION BUILDING (Tarragona & Zarragossa
Sts.)- See full sketch on other side of this folder.
MILL (Barracks and Main Sts.)-The railroad constructed the ter-
minal building at the port in 1903. The Preservation Board moved it
to this site in 1969. See full sketch of sawmill on other side of this
folder. The Terminal is listed in the National Register of Historic
23. TIVOLI COMPLEX (SE corner of Zarragossa and Barracks
Sts.)- See full sketch on other side of this folder.
24. DOROTHY WALTON HOUSE (221 E. Zarragossa St.)-
Dorothy Walton. widow of George Walton. a signer of the Declara-
tion of Independence from Georgia. is believed to have resided
here from 1822-1832. The house was deeded to Pensacola in
1964. moved to this location in 1966 by the Dorothy Walton Foun-
dation which began restoration which was completed by the His-
toric Pensacola Preservation Board.
25. MORENO COTTAGE (221 E. Zarragossa St., bit. 1879)-
Don Francisco Moreno. a local Spanish patriarch, built this "hon-
eymoon cottage" for his daughter, Perle. one of his 27 children,
when she married O. H. Smith. The Historic Pensacola Preserva-
tion Board owns the house.
26. OLD CHRIST CHURCH (Zarragossa & Adams Sts.)-See
full sketch on other side of this folder.
27. SEVILLE SQUARE (Adams & Zarragossa Sts.)-See full
sketch on other side of this folder.
ADAMS STREET-This street was created in the 1820s and
named in honor of John Quincy Adams, sixth President of the
United States (1825-1829).
28. DORR HOUSE (11 South Adams St., bit. 1871)--An ex-
ample of modified post-Civil War classic revival architecture, this
house reflects the lumber boom era through its high ceilings, wide
pine floors, jib windows, and straight wooden staircase. Clara Bark-
ley Dorr, widow of a prominent Pensacolian, had the house built in
1871 and lived there with her children until about 1895. The house
is open to visitors daily except Monday in spring and summer. List-
ed in the National Register of Historic Places.
29. LAVALLE HOUSE (203 E. Church St., bit. about 1810)-
Listed in the National Register of Historic Places. See full sketch
on other side of this folder.
30. MORENO-ANDERSON HOUSE (300 East Government
St., bit. 1859-68)-Theodore Moreno, a civil engineer and son of
Don Francisco Moreno, built this two-story home, typical of Gulf
Coast architecture, between 1859 and 1868. Moreno sold the house
in 1873 to William E. Anderson. Anderson lived in the house until
1898 during both terms he served as mayor of Pensacola (1893-
94 and 1896).
31. McLELLAND HOUSE (304 East Government St., bit. about
1879)-William H. McLelland built this house in about 1879 and
in 1886 constructed an addition with a bay window. In 1896, he
deeded it to Mary E. Stokes, wife of a local sea captain.
ALCANIZ STREET-Although the British called this Charlotte
Street, the Spanish named it Calle de Alcaniz.
iz St., bit. 1870s)-Jose Noriega, Sr., a Spanish officer who helped
rebuild Fort San Carlos in the 1790s, once owned this lot. Jose
Noriega, Jr., last Spanish Alcalde or mayor of Pensacola in 1821,
inherited the property. He sold the lot in 1818 to Capt. John Don-
elson, Jr.. Rachel Jackson's nephew, who fought under Old Hick-
ory in the Battle of New Orleans. Mary Susan Cavanaugh Smith
in the 1870s built the house which Musician's Local 253 now owns.

33. GRAY HOUSE (314 S. Alcaniz St.. bit. 1881-84)-According
to the owners who report hearing strange footsteps in the hall, an
early resident haunts this house. This structure reflects a Key West
34. LEE HOUSE (420 S. Alcaniz St.. bit. 1866)-William Franklin
Lee. an engineer and Confederate officer, who lost an arm in the
Battle of Chancellorsville in the Civil War, built this home in 1866.
While acting as a surveyor and land developer, he named Lee
Street for his family and Lloyd Street for his wife's. The Historic
Pensacola Preservation Board purchased the building and moved it
to this site, and the Pensacola Board of Realtors restored the home
for its office.
35. MARY PERRY HOUSE (434 E. Zaragossa St., bit. early
1880s) -Pensacola harbor pilot, Charles Perry, built this house for
his wife. Mary Thackeray Perry.
36. BARKLEY HOUSE (410 S. Florida Blanca St., bit. about
1815)-George Barkley is believed to have built this house, the old-
est masonry building in Pensacola, in 1815. Barkley, a prominent
local merchant, made this his home until his death in 1854.
37. AXELSON HOUSE (314 and 318 S. Florida Blanca St., bit.
1892 and 1888)-Gustave Axelson. captain of a three-masted
schooner that carried lumber from Pensacola to Latin America,
built the house at the corner of Florida Blanca and Zaragossa streets
in 1888. In about 1892, his brother, Birger Axelson, built the house
next door at 314 S. Florida Blanca.
38. BONIFAY HOUSE (435 E. Government St., bit. about
1815)-This cottage was built in the last Spanish period, but like
the Suzannah Cottage, the Bonifay House is of French West Indian
design. It received a severe restoration in 1974 using early nine-
teenth century methods and retaining such features as hand-hewn
floor joists and hand-made brick held by "oyster shell" mortar.
39. SUZANNAH'S COTTAGE (433 Government St.. bit. about
1804 -Built under the Spanish for a free woman of color. Suzan-
nah Crespo, this cottage is a French West Indian style and was
"saved" in 1973 by a severe restoration using old-time building
methods. Features include the original ceiling joists and hand-
made interior doors with colonial hardware.
MEETING HALL (416 East Government St., bit. 1895-96)-
Benevolent associations designed to aid members during sickness
and trouble were one of the many Creole contributions to Pensa-
cola's culture. This building was the meeting hall for St. Michael's
Creole Benevolent Association. organized in 1878 and disbanded
in 1971. Listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
41. QUINA HOUSE (204 S. Alcaniz St., bit. about 1810)-De-
siderio Quina. Sr.. a Spanish army veteran, purchased this house in
1827. It retains many original features typical of the Gulf Coast
architectural style including a double chimney. apron roof and re-
cessed front porch.
42. SITE OF THE CALABOZA (SW corner of Alcaniz & Inten-
dencia Sts.)-ln the 1770s the British constructed on this site a
small "gaol" that the Spanish also used as their "calaboza" from
1781 until 1821. Andrew Jackson locked up Lt. Col. Jose Callava.
the last Spanish Governor, here in a dispute over transfer of gov-
eming power. Later, local authorities imprisoned Jonathan Walker,
a Massachusetts shipwright accused of stealing slaves, in this jail.
Walker's imprisonment and subsequent branding with "SS" in-
spired John Greenleaf Whittier's poem "The Branded Hand."
43. ST. MICHAEL'S CEMETERY (Alcaniz & Garden Sts.)-
See full sketch on other side of this folder.

NOTE: If you want to see more of old Pensacola. you can wander
through the North Hill Preservation District, bounded by Gregory,
DeVilliers, Blount, and Palafox Streets. (See southeast corner of
district in map at left). Between the 1870s and 1920s. during the
days of Pensacola's prosperous lumber boom. residents built homes
in the most popular styles: "Queen Anne," Spanish Mission Reviv-
al. Classical Revival, and some in typical Gulf Coast style. In 1973
the Pensacola City Council at the request of homeowners in the
area established the Preservation District to preserve the unique
architectural character of their neighborhood. The "development"
of this district will require several years.

=K&D~EN Oil Big UZ l l~j8

z z

w w
CO) z,



>I -




23 24 25


While in Florida...
see as much of Florida as you can


j L J-e : *- ;
Suzannah's Cottage, built around 1804, was restored in 1973
using old-time building methods. 6





a. Uses permitted.

(1) Single-family and two-family (duplex) dwellings.

(2) Libraries, community centers and buildings used exclusively
by the federal, state, county, or city government for public purposes.

(3) Churches, Sunday School buildings and Parish houses.

(4) Accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to the
above uses not involving the conduct of a business,

(5) Home occupations.

(6) Publicly owned or operated parks and playgrounds.

(7) Special exceptions.

(7-1) Tourist homes.

(7-2) Antique shops.

(7-3) Art Galleries.

(7-4) Apartments.

b. Building height limit. No building shall exceed two and one half
stories or thirty-five feet in height.

c. Building site area required (intensity of use). The minimum
building site area shall be on a lot or a parcel of land five thousand square
feet in area for each single-family dwelling and six thousand square feet in
area for each two-family dwelling. Such parcels shall have a width of not
less than fifty feet at the minimum building setback line for a single-tamily
dwelling and not less than sixty feet for each two-family dwelling,

d. Front yard required. There shall be a front yard having a depth
of not less than fifteen feet. On through lots, the required front yard shall
be provided on both streets.

e. Side yard required. There shall be a side yard on each side of
the building having a width of not less than five feet.

f. Rear yard required. There shall be a rear yard having a depth of
not less than twenty-five feet.


a. Uses permitted.

(1) Any use permitted in the preceding district.

(2) Multiple family dwellings.

(3) Private clubs and lodges except those operated primarily as
commercial enterprises. .

(4) Boarding and lodging houses.

(5) Guest houses and tourist homes.

(6) Office buildings.

(7) Accessory buildings. Buildings and use customarily incident
to any of the above uses, including storage garages, when located on the same
lot and not involving the conduct of a business.

b. Building height limit. No building shall exceed two and one-half
stories or thirty-five feet in height.

c. Front yard required. There shall be a front yard having a depth of
not less than fifteen feet. On through lots, the required front yard shall be
provided on both streets.

d. Side yard required. There shall be a side yard on each side of the
building having a width of not less than five feet.

e. Rear yard required. There shall be a rear yard having a depth of
not less than twenty-five feet.


a. Uses permitted.

(1) Any use permitted in the preceding districts.

(2) Antique shops.

(3) Bakeries whose products are sold at retail and only on the

(4) Banks.

(5) Barbershops and beauty parlors.

(6) Shops for the collection and distribution of garments and similar
materials, for dyeing and cleaning establishments.

(7) Other retail shops with a maximum floor area of three thousand
square feet.

(8) Studios.

(9) Vending machines when an accessory to a business establishment
and located in the same building as the business.

(10) Small appliance repair shops.

(11) Floral gardens.

(12) Hand craft shops for custom work or making the custom items
not involving noise, odor, or chemical waste.

(13) Pawn shops or second hand stores.

(14) Small printing shops.

(15) Special exceptions.

(15-1) Taverns, lounges, nightclubs, cocktail bars.

(15-2) Marinas.

(15-3) Restaurants (except drive-ins).

(15-4) Motels.

(15-5) Commercial parking lots.

(15-6) New car agencies (Ord. No. 21-72, 4/27/72)

(16) Accessory buildings and uses customarily incident to the above

c. Building height limit. No building shall exceed four stories in height.

d. Side and rear yard required. There shall be no minimum front yard
requirement. There shall be no side yard required except for dwellings or for
frame structures in which case five feet shall be required. There shall be a
rear yard of at least fifteen feet.


The following requirements or regulations qualify or supplement as
the case may be, the district regulations or requirements appearing else-
where in this chapter:

a. Chimneys, water tanks or towers, elevator bulkheads, stacks,
and necessary mechanical appurtenances may be erected to a height in ac-
cordance with existing or hereafter adopted ordinances of the City.

b. The side yard requirements for dwellings shall be waived where
dwellings are erected above stores or shops.

c. Every part of a required yard shall be open from its lowest point
to the sky unobstructed; except for the ordinary projection of sills, belt
courses, cornices, buttresses, ornamental features and eaves; provided,
however, none of the above projection shall project into a minimum side
yard more than twenty-four inches.

d. Open or enclosed fire escapes, fireproof outside stairways and
balconies projecting into a minimum yard or court not more than three and
one-half feet and the ordinary projections of chimneys and flues may be
permitted by the Architectural Review Board where the same are so placed
as not to obstruct the light and ventilation.

e. On corner lots in residential districts, the side yard regulations
shall apply on the street side as well as on the inside; but on a corner lot
owned as a separate unit as shown of record on date of passage of this or-
dinance, a building at least twenty-eight feet wide may be constructed not-
withstanding the side yard regulations. If a building on a corner lot shall
not face in the same direction as the building on the adjoining lot on either
street, there shall be a side yard adjacent to the street on which the build-
ing does not face not less in width than fifty percent of the front yard re-
quired on that street and no accessory building on such corner lot shall ex-
tend beyond the front line on that street; but this regulation shall not prevent
the erection of an accessory building in any case where the regulation can-
not reasonably be complied with.


a. Off-street parking is required in all zoning districts. The follow-
ing off-street parking is required by this Ordinance:

(1) Single family dwellings None required.

(2) Libraries, community centers, and buildings of federal, state,
county and city government 1 space for each two employees plus 1 space
for each 500 square feet of gross floor area in the building.

(3) Churches 1 space for each four seats.

(4) Multiple family buildings 1 1/2 space for each unit.

(5) Private clubs, fraternities and lodges 1 parking space for
each 200 square feet of gross floor area.

(6) Boarding and lodging homes 1 space for each unit.

(7) Guest houses and tourist houses 1 space for each sleeping
room for the first four sleeping rooms plus 1 space for each additional two
sleeping rooms.

(8) Office buildings One space for each 200 square feet of gross
floor area in the buildings.

(9) Banks, stores, and shops for the conduct of a retail business -
1 space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area in the building plus 1
space for each two full-time employees.

(10) Barbershops and beauty parlors One space for each chair
plus 1 space for each employee.

(11) Restaurants One space for each five seats, plus 1 space for
each three employees.

(12) Studios One space for each 200 square feet of gross floor
area in the building, plus 1 space for each two employees.

(13) Motels One space per unit, plus 1 space for each three em-

(14) Taverns, cocktail bars, and night clubs 1 space for each
two employees plus 1 space for each three seats.

(15) Any use not covered by this ordinance shall require one
parking space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area in the building.

b. Parking Lots Design of parking lots, spaces, and driveways
shall be subject to approval of the Architectural Review Board.

For all parking lots, a solid wall, fence or compact hedge not less
than four (4) feet high shall be erected along the lot lines) when autos or
lots are visible from the street.

All parking stalls shall measure not less than nine (9) feet by eighteen
(18) feet. Proper ingress and egress from the lot shall be required and ade-
quate interior drives shall be required for all parking lots.

Where the required number of parking spaces result in a fraction, an
extra space shall be provided.

c. Uses not providing minimum number of spaces Those individuals,
firms, or corporations who develop one of the perrri tted uses in the Historical
District and do not provide the minimum number of off-street parking spaces
as required by the Ordinance shall pay to the Historical Commission such sum
of money equal to the difference of the value of the cost of land and improve-
ments needed to construct a parking lot of a size that would be needed to furnish
the minimum number of parking spaces required by this ordinance and the value
of the land and improvements actually used as a parking lot in partial compliance
with this ordinance. Such sum shall be held in escrow and used by the Histori-
cal Commission for the purpose of acquiring land and constructing parking lots
and shall be used for this purpose and no other.

The aforementioned value shall be determined jointly by the City Manager
and the Developer. If the City Manager and the developer cannot agree on a
value, then the value shall be established by arbitration. The City Manager
shall appoint a professional appraiser and the developer shall appoint a profes-
sional appraiser and these two shall appoint a third.


a. The following signs shall be permitted in the Historical District:

(1) One non-illuminated sign advertising the sale, lease, or rental
of the lot or building, said sign not exceeding six square feet in area.

(2) One sign per lot for churches, schools, apartment buildings,
boarding or lodging houses, libraries, and community centers, and historic
sites serving as identification and/or bulletin boards not to exceed twelve
square feet in area. The signs may be placed flat against the wall of the build-
ing or may be free-standing provided that it be no closer to any property line
than ten feet. Such signs may be illuminated provided the source of light
shall not be visible beyond the property line of the lot on which the sign is lo-

(3) A non-illuminated sign not more than 100 square feet in area
in connection with new construction work and displayed only during such time
as the actual construction work is in progress.

(4) One non-illuminated name plat designating the name of the oc-
cupant of the property; the name plate shall not be larger than 100 square inches
and may be attached to the dwelling or be free-standing except the top of a
free-standing name plate shall not be more than 18 inches above ground level.

(5) Municipal or state installed directional signs, historical mark-
ers and other signs of a general public interest when approved by the City

(6) Any accessory sign, attached to a building or free standing.

b. Signs generally The design and materials of all signs shall be
subject to approval by the Architectural Review Board.


A non-conforming building or structure may be used and maintained
as provided in this section.

a. Structural alterations additions:

(1) That in a non-conforming building or structure which is non-
conforming as to USE regulations, in addition to being non-conforming as to
other provisions) of this Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, no structural
alterations or additions shall be made.

(2) A building or structure non-conforming as to floor area ratio
and/or lot coverage shall not be structurally altered or added to.

(3) A building or structure non-conforming as to lot area may be
added to or structurally altered, provided that any additions shall conform
to the regulations of the zone in which it is located.

(4) A building or structure non-conforming as to height regula-
tions may be structurally altered and/or added to, provided any additions
shall conform to the regulations of the District in which located.

(5) A non-conforming building, non-conforming only as to the
yard regulations, may not be added to or enlarged in any manner, unless
the additions or enlargements conform to all the regulations of the zone in
which they are located.

b. Extension of Use:

The non-conforming use of a non-conforming building may be ex-
tended throughout any part of the building clearly designated for such use,
but not so used at the effective date of this ordinance.

c. Restoration of damaged buildings:

(1) A non-conforming building or structure which is damaged or
partially destroyed by fire, floor, wind, earthquake, or other calamity or
act of God or the public enemy, to the extend of not more than fifty percent
(50%) of its value at that time, may be restored and the occupancy or use of
such building, structure, or part thereof, which existed at the time of such
partial destruction, may be continued or resumed, provided restoration shall
be started within a period of six (6) months.

d. Continuation and Change of Use:

(1) The non-conforming use of a non-conforming building or struc-
ture may be continued, any non-conforming building or structure which was
designed and arranged, and which is used for a use not permitted within the
Historical District, shall be removed or it shall be altered and converted to
a conforming building or structure designed for and used for a use permitted
in the District in which it is located, within six (6) months after the termina-
tion of the respective periods of time set out hereinafter, such periods shall
be computed from the effective date of this Ordinance. The following are
hereby established as the reasonable periods for amortization of the normal,
useful life of each class of building and type of construction above the founda-
tions, said types of construction being as defined and specified in the Southern
Standard Building Code.

(a) Type I Fireproof Construction 25 years

(b) Type II Fire Resistive Construction 20 years

(c) Type III Heavy Timber Construction 15 years

(d) Type IV Non Combustible Frame
Construction 10 years

(e) Type V Ordinary Construction 10 years

(f) Type VI Wood Frame Construction 5 years

(2) The non-conforming use of a non-conforming building or struc-
ture may be replaced by a different use permissible in the same zoning dis-
trict as the original non-conforming use or a use in a more restricted zoning
district provided the change of use occurs within six (6) months. Any such
non-conforming building or structure which is vacant for a continuous period
of more than six (6) months shall not thereafter be occupied except by a use
which conforms to the use regulations of the zone in which such non-conform-
ing building is located.


The non-conforming use of a conforming building or structure is provided
for in this Section.

a. Continuation and change of use.

(1) The non-conforming use of a conforming building or structure
may be continued, except that in the residential zones any non-conforming
commercial or industrial use of a residential building or residential accessory

building shall be discontinued within five (5) years of the effective date of this

(2) The non-conforming use of a conforming building or structure
may be replaced by a different use permissible in the same zoning district
as the original non-conforming use or a use in a more restricted zoning dis-
trict provided the change of use occurs within six (6) months.

b. Extension of use.

Any non-conforming use which occupies a portion of a conforming
building, shall not be extended to any other part of the building or extended
to occupy any land outside the building nor any additional building on the
same plot.


a. Continuation Limitation

(1) The non-conforming use of land shall be discontinued within
five (5) years from the date the use became non-conforming, in each of the
following cases:

(a) Where no buildings are employed in connection with such

(b) Where the only buildings employed are accessory or in-
cidental to such use;

(c) Where such use is maintained in connection with a con-
forming building.

(2) A non-conforming use of land which is accessory or inciden-
tal to the non-conforming use of a non-conforming building, shall be discon-
tinued on the same date the non-conforming use of the building is discontinued.

(3) Except as provided in paragraphs (1) and (2) above, the non-
conforming use of land may be continued, but shall be subject to the follow-
ing limitations:

(a) Such use shall not be changed, except to a use which con-
forms to the regulations of the zone in which such land is located; and

(b) If such use is discontinued it shall not thereafter be re-

b. Extension of use

Such use shall not be expanded or extended in any way either on the
same or adjoining land.

c. Continuation of Signs Billboards

Any sign, billboard, commercial advertising structure or statuary
which lawfully existed and was maintained at the time this Article became ef-
fective, may be continued, although such structures do not conform to all the
provisions thereof; provided that no structural alterations are made thereto
and that all such non-conforming signs, billboards, commercial advertising
structures and statuary and their supporting members shall be completely re-
moved from the premises not later than two (2) years from the effective date
of this Ordinance.


Any lawful use of land or structure existing at the effective date of this
Ordinance, and which by its terms has become a non-conforming use, is
hereby declared not to be in violation at this Ordinance's effective date.
Such a non-conforming use shall be subject to all of the provisions of this
Ordinance pertaining to its continuance, change and discontinuance.


The casual, temporary, or illegal use of land, building or structure
shall not be sufficient to establish the existence of a non-conforming use or
to create any rights in the continuance of such use.


Whenever a building or structure or a use of a building, structure, or
land becomes non-conforming because of a change of zone or change in the
regulations, and a period of time is specified in this Section for the removal
of such non-conforming building, structure, or use, said period of time
shall be computed from the effective date of such change.


a. Height of fences. In all zoning districts a fence no higher than
three (3) feet may be constructed and maintained within the front yard.
Fences may be built to a maximum of six feet on the side and to the rear
of the front yard setbad< line. Fences shall be permitted to the sidewalk,
or if there is no sidewalk, to the right-of-way line of a public street. Solid
fences on corner lots shall observe the minimum setback requirements if
the fence exceeds three (3) feet in height.

b. Fences generally. No chain link, concrete block or barbed wire
will be permitted. Approved materials will include but not necessarily be
limited to wood, brick, stone, and wrought iron. Fences are subject to
approval by the Architectural Review Board.



No provision of this Ordinance shall be interpreted to prevent the restora-
tion or reconstruction of any historic building or feature (as listed by the Pensa-
cola Historical Restoration and Preservation Commission) in its original style,
dimensions or position, or on its original archeological foundations.


The Zoning Board of Adjustment will hear and decide only such special ex-
ceptions as specifically authorized by the terms of this Ordinance; to decide
such questions as are involved in determining whether special exceptions should
be granted; and to grant special exceptions with such conditions and safeguards
as are appropriate under this ordinance, or to deny special exceptions when not
in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance. A special exception
shall not be granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment unless and until:

a. A written application for a special exception is submitted indicating
the section of this Ordinance under which the special exception is sought and
stating the grounds on which it is requested.

b. Notice shall be given at least ten (10) days in advance of public hear-
ing. The owner of the property for which special exception is sought or his
agent shall be notified by mail. Notice of such hearings shall be posted on the
property for which special exception is sought, at the City Hall, and in one
other public place at least 10 days prior to the public hearing;

c. The public hearing shall be held. Any party may appear in person,
or by agent or attorney;

d. The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall make a finding that it is em-
powered under the section of this Ordinance described in the application to
grant the special exception, and that the granting of the special exception will
not adversely affect the public interest.

e. Before any special exception shall issue, the Board shall make writ-
ten findings certifying compliance with the specific rules governing individual
special exceptions and that satisfactory provision and arrangement has been
made concerning the following, where applicable:

(1) Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon
with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe;

(2) Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with par-
ticular attention to the items in (1) above and the economic, noise, glare, or
odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and properties
generally in the district;

(3) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to the
items in (1) and (2) above;

(4) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and com-

(5) Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimension,
and character;

(6) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference
to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with
properties in the district;

(7) Requi red yards and other open space;

(8) Use compatibility with adjacent properties and other property
in the district.

f. Procedure for Review. Any person aggrieved by a decision of
the Board, may, within 15 days thereafter, apply to the Council of the City
of Pensacola for review of the Board's decision. He shall file with the
City Manager a written notice requesting the Council to review said decision.

ARTICLE III Adopted: 11/14/68


/s/ Charles Soule


/s/ Kenneth K. Conrey
City Clerk

Legal in form and valid if enacted:

/s/ Dave Caton
City Attorney


1. Petitioner submits a letter to the Director of Planning, stating: (1)
a legal description of the property; (2) existing zoning; (3) desired
zoning; and (4) reason for rezoning request.

2. A non-refundable fee of $100 shall be paid to the City at the time said
rezoning application is made to cover the administrative, advertising
and mailing costs of processing same.

3. The City Planning Board cannot legally approve "spot zoning" and
discourages zoning for speculation. If the rezoning request is for
speculation, the potential buyer should have an option on the land and
a specific use in mind.

4. It is advantageous for the petitioner to obtain a signed petition from the
property owners within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the property
to be rezoned, indicating they do not object to the proposed zoning

5. The Planning Board meets on the first Thursday of each month. Re-
zoning requests should be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. of the
preceding Thursday.

6. The petitioner or a representative is required to be present at the Plan-
ning Board meeting, as the Planning Board will not consider applications
not represented.

7. The Planning Board's recommendation to either approve or deny the
rezoning request will be submitted to the City Council not later than
sixty (60) days after submission of the application to the City Planning

8. The Planning Board Secretary will then review the Planning Board's
recommendation to approve or deny the request with the Planning and
Zoning Committee of City Council.

9. When City Council calls a public hearing, everyone within five hundred
(500) feet of the boundaries of the area to be rezoned are notified by
mail and invited to appear to register their approval or objection, if so
desired. If more than 20% of the notified property owners object by
petition submitted 48 hours prior to the Council meeting, eight (8)
Council votes are required to approve the request. Otherwise, six (6)
votes are a majority to approve the change.

10. If City Council approves the rezoning request at the public hearing,
an ordinance is drawn and read at two separate meetings following the
public hearing. The rezoning is then effective immediately after the
second reading of the ordinance.

11. Minimum time required for the total rezoning process is 90 days.





The mission of signs erected by governmental agencies in the District is to
communicate with and be helpful to the visitor with a minimum of detraction
from the restored nineteenth-century environment that is the District goal.
A uniform signing system helps give order and unity to the District, and
its proper use helps minimize the number of signs. Necessary signs should
communicate concisely and with dignity and become the signature and
authority of the District. They provide continuity of image throughout the
An effective uniform signing system includes specific designs, styles,
shapes, sizes, typefaces, colors, construction, and symbols with universal
understanding. The components and finished signs must harmonize with the
environment and yet motivate the visitor. They must be warm and human
rather than impose upon the visitor.
The signing system in this manual attempts to cover most of the signs
necessary for the area as a living part of the City or which are part of the
interpretative effort of the Historical District. However, other needs will arise
and additional pages for this manual are anticipated.
This manual also includes the regulations for commercial signs in the
District, under the direct supervision of the City of Pensacola's Architectural
Review Board. These regulations have been supplemented by some examples
of appropriate commercial signs, which in some cases, can actually enrich
the historical atmosphere of the District rather than detract from it. Imple-
mentation of both programs is a vital element in creating an historical
district which will merit the respect of both the visitor and the professional

Thlii' Iubllit lti t n \\ s I lt v hloatI d l I M pi lisht d biy ti le lP' nstcl:l.I-l -s;i m lh; Dl v lop1thn1nt .',m'lnlissionn. a ijint nc.v a lil thlt' _'ity
"Il IPl .nsi I ol; ri l l.:n .: ("ii i,1i Co'iuntI*?%. illn o ,pr, ion iti ll ith I l istl uric IPel' ns l.Ic I re'rvatiti n Hlia rdl. ;t Fhl ridl; st;.tt o n enc".. and;
t lI .\ArIl it*'ctl I '1 i('l \ I l ;Irdl l t 11. 'it(.t of l'lnsir l +;i. (-'npT)l ri llht. 1i97::. 1 l'I, a l.ucI o l':s;um li;i I )c've tl pmn1( 'lt .Co illnm ission.

1. All official signs will be authorized, created,
erected, and maintained by the City of Pensacola
or the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board. No
other governmental agency, organization, or individ-
ual has authority to erect any other sign of an
official nature or to alter, deface, remove, or destroy
a sign erected under this system, subject to legal
action by the City of Pensacola.

2. Official signs may be suggested or requested by
letter to the Director, Historic Pensacola Preserva-
tion Board, 200 E. Zaragoza Street, Pensacola,
Florida, 32501. Other communications concerning
official signs should be made to the Director, also.

3. All official signs remain the property of the
City of Pensacola or the Historic Pensacola Pres-
ervation Board, as the case may be, even if erected
on private property, and are subject to the regula-
tions in this manual.

4. The Historic Pensacola Preservation Board,
through its staff, will establish (1) a periodic system
of inspection of all official signs for maintenance,
proper information, and replacement as needed and
(2) an annual review of the entire system to evaluate
need for both existing signs and additional signs.

5. A committee will be appointed by the chairman
of the Historic Pensacola Preservation Board to
establish a specific schedule and content for signs
for this program, to plan funding for such a
schedule and its maintenance, and to carry out the
intent and spirit of the program as outlined in this
manual. The committee will seek professional
design services provided by the Pensacola-Escambia
Development Commission as needed and will keep
liaison with the Pensacola Architectural Review
Board as necessary to control the various signs of
all types within the Historical District.

6. In no case will the building, lettering, erection,
repair, maintenance, or alteration of the signs in
this program be carried out by personnel other than
experienced carpenters or cabinet makers, sign
letterers or commercial artists. Labor by lay per-
sonnel or personnel not specifically qualified for
such work will render the program ineffective and
an embarrassment to the entire restoration move-
ment in Pensacola.

Type Style for Letters
-Type style for all lettering is Clarendon, an old,
well-established typeface, unaffected and easy to
read. The example below is a modified version of
Clarendon upper case letters, which will be used
on all street signs. This is the only modified use of
the Clarendon face in this manual. All other
lettering will be rendered in Clarendon Italic and/or
Clarendon Italic shaded.

Sign Colors
-The three colors for sign faces are brown (base
color), white (for lettering and trim), and black (for
shading and trim). These colors can be used to
minimize disturbing or unnatural qualities intro-
duced by signs, yet can enhance legibility and target
value. Letters and sign borders will be white on a
brown background, with black shading as desirable.
A paint sample of the official brown is below. It can
be matched exactly by Merritt Paint Company in
Pensacola, and it is recommended that several
gallons be stocked by the Historic Pensacola Pres-
ervation Board for use by signpainters. Standard
printing sample for this color is PMS-463. Match-
ing paper stock is Strathmore Grandee (Cordoba



A modification of the standard
city street sign will be used in
the Historic District. The
shaded Clarendon lettering will
be furnished to the 3M
Company, which supplies the
sign material. The existing steel
posts will either be painted
brown to match the sign or
possibly encased with a wood
sleeve as illustrated-which-
ever method is determined to
be most practicable.


Sign Face Materials
-The basic sign materials are woods-
either cypress or fir.

Clarendon Italic
Clarendon Italic is to be used on all hand-
lettered signs. The Clarendon Italic shaded
will be used on sizes as indicated on the first
two lines of the sign illustrated below. In
sizes smaller than that illustrated on the
opposite page, the approved form is Claren-
don Italic without shading, for ease of
lettering and economy.



Sv It



gI I

Signs previously shown can be mounted by
different methods.

A Here, this 19" x 15" sign is mounted on a 30" cypress
or fir post (embedded in poured concrete to prevent theft).

II _


SThis 30" x 24" sign is mounted on twin wood posts and
is appropriate for marking such sites as the British
Kitchen Foundation in the southwest corner of Seville
Square. Any sign smaller than this would not be visually

C Here, the 19" x 15" sign is embedded in a brick column
to show the size relationship between the bricks and
the 19" x 15" sign.


L- 1 il



This shows how a 19" x 15" sign
can be placed in relationship
to the building it identifies.

The sketches on these two pages
indicate other ways
of positioning signs in
relation to the structures
they identify. Each case
is determined by the
appearance, scale, and
positioning of the house
on its lot.



House Numbers
-This is the actual size reproduction
of a typical house number sign.
The numerals on the opposite page
are to be used as approved 'examples
of the Clarendon typeface.
The sketch below indicates one way
to position the house number at
an entrance. Care should be taken
not to shield the house number
with shrubbery, lights, porch columns,
or any other element.