Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural Review Commission approves Tampa Theatre rooftop addition with conditions
Summary
The City of Tampa Architectural Review Commission voted unanimously May 5 to approve a rooftop addition, masonry cleaning and related exterior work at the historic Tampa Theatre, placing conditions on lighting, rooftop mechanicals, color and window design.
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tampa — The City of Tampa Architectural Review Commission voted unanimously May 5 to grant a certificate of appropriateness for a rooftop addition and exterior repairs to the Tampa Theatre, conditioned on several design changes recommended by staff and commissioners.
The commission approved the project after staff told the panel the National Park Service had given preliminary approval and that the theater’s owner and design team were seeking federal rehabilitation tax incentives. The project is part of a $28,000,000 restoration campaign slated for 2026 and would add a small fourth-floor volume on the Florida Avenue wing, repair and clean masonry, restore windows and add limited exterior lighting while creating new education and staff space.
Commission staff and the project team told the commission they worked for more than two years with the State Historic Preservation Office and the National Park Service to refine the design so it would be “recessive” and compatible with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Heather Bonds, Historic Preservation Specialist, said staff reviewed the proposal against Section 27-115K4 of the City Code and the Secretary of the Interior standards and found the project met those criteria; she listed staff conditions for final approval in her report.
John Bell, president and CEO of Tampa Theatre Inc., framed the project as part of a larger preservation and program-expansion plan. “The project that you’re reviewing this evening is part of a $28,000,000 restoration campaign that will occur in 2026,” Bell said, adding that the organization had spent more than two years developing the plans. Architect Andrew Gale of DLR Group presented drawings showing a light-colored terracotta-clad setback addition, enlarged storefront glazing for a “creative lab,” and new roof-mounted mechanical equipment.
Staff and commissioners pressed for more detail on several points: screening and the vertical extent of rooftop mechanical equipment, the color and material of the terracotta cladding and whether it should visually tie to adjacent stucco, the appearance and placement of new exterior lighting, and the window configuration on the Polk Avenue and Florida Avenue facades. Dennis Fernandez, Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Manager, described the review history: early contemporary options were pared back, the addition was set further from parapets and the color was lightened to recede from the landmark facades.
The commission’s approval included explicit recommendations to the applicant and staff for the applicant to submit at final review and to forward to the National Park Service: remove or relocate the proposed small recessed light fixtures on historic columns in favor of alternative lighting that avoids penetrating historic terracotta; reexamine chiller siting and height and investigate lower-profile or split-unit options; adjust the addition’s color palette to better relate to adjacent historic materials; and review the proposed window layout, including the additional Polk Avenue window, for better visual balance or symmetry.
Staff also noted the project has received preliminary National Park Service concurrence for tax-credit review and that final federal review (part 2) and city final Certificate of Appropriateness submittals will need to address detailed materials, cleaning methods for masonry, structural and roof drainage details, and easement reviews for any encroaching fixtures.
Commissioners voted to grant the certificate of appropriateness with the conditions described above; the motion passed by voice vote with no roll-call oppositions. Outcome: approved (conditions; final federal and local review required).

