07/29/1981
It
~
. ,
, , ' " . I .' .~. ~ r ;
"
" ~
.'
.~
,
~"" "
,
Ol!
benefit of the Hearing Officer. The auto sales facility itself
was grandfathered in.
James Hennagir stated the Saporitos began a car lot on this
property over twenty years ago and it has been there much longer
than the professional offices. On the east side of Ft. Harrison
there is only one other residential property in addition to that
owned by the Saporitos. It is important to the business to have
the storage facility, as they buy problem cars for repair and
resale. The operation does not include salvag~ and repair work
is farmed out to Fulton Automotive. They do not advertise to
buy junk cars; only those which can be repaired and sold.
There is no direct view to the lots in question from the west'
side of Ft. Harrison. He suggested the petition presented at
the last hearing in opposition was not signed by affected
persons.
By reques~Mr. Hennagir read into the record the Clearwater
Sun ads and stated they do employ a person to do odd jobs and
minor repairs for drop-in customers, but this is not their
primary activity. There have been as many as SO cars stored
on the two lots at one time, but currently there are about 20.
Prior to the last hearing they eliminated most of the objection-
able cars and will try to maintain that policy.
Virginia Morelli, adjacent property owner for 40 years,
stated there has been a general trend toward improvement in
this area. The lots in question have been used for storage
approximately 1-1/2 years and repair work is being performed
at the facility. A man whom she personally asked to do 50
obtained signatures on the earlier petition.
Mr. Hennagir questioned how 80 signatures could appear on
the petition submitted today as affected parties when there
, are only two residences within the 200 ft. radius required
by the code for notices.
In summation, Harry Cline stated the proposed use is not
in the public interest and the applicant is presently in
violation of the code. This activity is a fairly recent
turn of events and is an adverse change. The persons who
signed the petition have property along Ft. Harrison or
in the Harbor Oaks Subdivision immediately west; however,
any citizen of Clearwater has the right to know what is
going on within the City. He requested the Heating Officer
weigh heavily the unanimous decision of the Board of Adjustment
and Appeal.
In summation, Leslie Conklin stated the area is improving
arid the extension of a nonconforming use is detrimental.
~.~.:.~.:;,.-:; ,', ..,'
.r 0\" c . .,'
.. ...r, n" ." l _ . .'<,
~r:t~i~:~j~~~J?;!:><,,;;,.' . :;:'" . '. . . .','. ..\
~'l ~\~"..i."'4'!\.~""} I' " ,",~. .r,1 . ~.. < .i.. .... .' ..~. ..... . "" ~. ."
~l ~ :]tt:~~lj;~J\~X~:~~:~'~:<+~:'...,~.,~:+:../J::~\:::~'F ",:'~;',~!.,'.';:~'~-o\~.;.\': ':l.S. . ~',".,- "~h>" ~: f: '.. I " ; '~,t.:....:. :'.:.: ~ . .,..:~ .' , '.~...:,~>i~.:
",..'J;.....P'~~().'f1t"".tIU'lI.,I..I~.,}.Jr....;'l,.....,'...lr.\I,,~r,.i....,7......f{I...'P.' .,. ~"~..~\.... ,I'! ~ ~: " ".~.... ' . ',fl.' ~.' .'~':.<':.
.~~.~i.i.~/<.~I.J.. +p' ..,,'" /. .. I ~~ ~ ,.., -I-oi \~. -(1.' "t .',~ ... ~ "':5"'~' ').. ~ . , " ~ " 7/10/81'" ~', .~
l ' ';v'~~'I~'.f)~ .-~~\j~fRr) .r,'.~;~~,::::.'~]!.~':;:-f?:~,;;;L~.';"~';{:, ',,:k;.~ .i" t~ :.1 ., "~'}. ":'~" ";" ".....,..':;." '. '. './'. . ~ :'.' "'" '. ' ' . -',' '.
< ..~};." ....~~1; 41,'.;;.?r'{,....f...>""",.f(>1'(it~I.'..t"i~~~..:...,!..~H......f......,- ....~ I...'<...'~:'........:' .. r _l~ ~ .<._ .! ..~ 1"", . .... .
o
., In summation, the City Attorney questioned the compatibility
of this activity with other uses in the area. The railroad forms
an effective buffer from the concrete company and an activity of
this type does not fit into the pattern of improvement. ~
In summation, Mr. Hennagir pointed out the sales activity
will continue on Ft. Harrison whether the special exception is
granted or not; therefore, Ft. Harrison will neither be upgraded
nor downgraded since the lots in question are not on Ft. Harrison.
Their sales have shown that the public is interested in the type
of transportation their cars provide, and they should not be
penalized by recent upgrading of the area. The railroad really
does not separate the concrete company from the area.
Any proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law should
be mailed no later than July 20, 1981.
The Hearing adjourned at 12:00 noon.
.tw.,~q~ ~'. ~-/
,Ci1:Y Clerk
e,
, I
I
i: I
r j i
J ~. .
. I
, .,
"
I,
" '
. .'/
"
;,; <
"
~ . .: .
. .,'
. J, r ~
~ ~ .'..c
!";
. ,..
.
~
v:..'IW
-
\ "
, .
3/
~ I,
~
n
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
MARY SAPORITO, )
Petitioner, ) CASE NO. 81-1479
VB. )
CITY OF CLEARWATER, )
Responden t:. )
~ )
FINAL ORDER
Pursuant to Notice, the Division of Administrative
Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, DONALD R.
ALEXANDER, held a formal hearing in this case on July 10,
19B1, in Clearwater, Florida.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner:
Mr. James L. Hennagir
1007 South Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33516
\\
For Respondent: Thomas A. Bustin, Esquire
P. O. Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida 33518
For Intervenorl
Marie Paoletti:
Harry S. Cline, Esquire
P. O. Box 1669
Clearwater, Florida 33517
,By application filed on April 1, 1981, Petitioner,
Mary Rose Saporito, sought a special exception pursuant to
',Section 23.03 (1) ~ of Ordinances, to operate a automobile
storage yard as a part of a used automobile sales business on
Lots 6 and 7 of Block 34, Magnolia Park Subdivision, at 1007
South Fort Harrison Avenue, Clearwater, Florida. That same date,
the City of Clearwater Zoning Enforcement Officer denied the
application on the ground it did not conform to the require-
ments of.Section 131.142(1), Code of Ordinances (now codified
as Section 23.0J(1), supra). Pursuant to the provisions of
Section' 35.09 (3), Code of ordinances, the decision was" appealed
~o the City of Clearwater Board of Adjustment and Appeal on
'.. +
<.' ,
. .
e
~
'e
",
'.
n
n
ground the request was "inconsistent with the coden.
The instant case arises from an appeal of that decision
filed by Petitioner on April 30, 1981, pursuant to Section
35.10, Code of Ordinances. That Section provides a process
for any party in interest to appeal a decision of the Board to
a Zoning Appeal Hearing Officer. Under a contractual agreement
entered into by the City of Clearwater and the Division of
Administrative Hearings, and authorized by Section 120.65(6),
Florida Statutes, and Section 35.10(E) (1), Code of Ordinances,
the undersigned Hearing Officer was designated as Zoning Appeal
Hearing Officer.
The final hearing was scheduled for June 25, 1981, in
clearwater, Florida. It was subsequently rescheduled to July
10, 1981, at the same location. At the final hearing Petitioner
presented the testimony of James L. Hennagir, who is president
of Red Door Motors, Inc., the lessee on Saporitots property. '
Respondent, City of Clearwater, presented the testimony of John
Richter, chief of the planning division of the City Planning
Department. Intervenor, Paoletti, presented the testimony of
Virginia Morelli who opposed the application and offered
opposition Exhibits land 2, each of which was received into
evidence. Additionally, an adjacent property owner, Leslie M.
Conklin, presented testimony in opposition to the proposed
zoning change. Under the provision of Section 35.10(3), Code
~ Ordinances, the record of the Boardts meeting on April 23,
19B1, its decision and the exhibits submitted at its meeting
have been made a part of the record.
The parties were given the opportunity to file proposed
findings of fact and conclusions of law; however, none were filed.
Based upon the entire record, the following findings
of , fact are determined:
. "
FINDINGS OF FACT
'., 1. Petitioner, Mary Rose Saporito, is the owner of
4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 34, Magnolia Park Subdivision, located
. .'
"
~
~
~
n
at 1007 South Fort Harrison hvenue, Clearwater, Florida. The
.
property is currently leased to Red Door Motors, Inc. which
operates a used car lot on tho promises. Lots 4 and 5 front on
South Fort Harrison Avenue and are used to display automobiles
ready for sale to the public. A sales office is alBo located
on the premises. Approximately lB months ago, Lots 6 and 7,
which adjoin Lots 4 and 5 on its eastward side and which had
previously been vacant, were cleared. Shortly thereafter, Red
Door Motors began obtaining a number of older motor vehicles
which were in disrepair and that'r~quired substantial work before
they were ready for resale. As many as 50 such cars were
procured and stored on Lots 6 and 7 at one time. Because of
complaints to the City registered by adjacent property owners,
Petitioner was told it must obtain a special exception in order
to store or park automobiles on the, lots'in question.
2. The property is situated within an area currently
zoned by the City as CG (General Business District). This
District permits apartment type developments, retail and
professional uses. The Code prescribes no less than sixteen
specified permitted uses and structures within the District, but
does not authorize used cars sales. However, the front portion
of the property (Lots 4 and 5) has been used for automobile
sales for approximately 20 years, and as such, is a non-conform-
ing use that may be continued subject to certain conditions.
3. A number of special exceptions to the permitted
uses are authorized within a CG District, including a storage
_ yard "when shielded from view from any public way." If the
application is granted, and appropriate shielding requirements
are met, the intended use will be consistent with the Land Use
Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
4. Petitioner considers the entire property (LO~s
,4; 5, 6 and 7) as being a part of the used car lot. It intends
,t.o use' Lots. 6 and 7 to store older and disabled automobiles
They will then be displayed
I "
. .
~
n.
'I'
Only minor repairs (e.g., replacing tires, batterios, hrakes
~ and the like) will be done on the premises while major repair
work will be done at a garage in another part of the City. The
Petitioner represented that under no circumstances would the
,
e
lots be used as a junk or salvage yard, a place to store
obsolete automobiles or where parts would be taken off one
automobile to be used on another. However, such activities did
take place prior to the City advi~ing petitioner of its need to
obtain a special exception.
5. With the exception of one lot (Lot B), the property
in question generally covers the southern half of Block 34 which
is bounded on the west by Fort Harrison Avenue, Magnolia Avenue
on the north, Lotus Path on the south and railroad tracks on its
eastern boundary. Directly to the north and east of Petitioner's
p~operty are single-family residences and a grocery store. To the
south (across Lotus Path) lie a series of offices used primarily
by professional persons. Directly to the east are railroad
tracks which separate Blocks 34 and 35. A cement plant covers
a substantial part of Block 35. Across the street on the
western side of Fort Harrison the predominate uses are multi- ,'; :
family residences, single-family dwellings and office developments.
The trend in recent years has been a general upgrading of the
area with a focus on professional and retail offices.
6. The City's primary objection is that the proposed
storage yard will not be consistent with the "character" of the
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
" ,
1. The Division of Administrative Hearings' has
.' "..,.,._:.:'_jurisd~~tion of the subject matter and the parties theret:o .
i~:i;;:':./?,~,/:r,:c..':,' ":,' :',', ' ',',
?~;~~.,~:';):?!\~~~~:;.~~.~~.~~,~.~t:o., Section 1~0. 65 (6), Flori~a Sta~utes, and ~ection
(i.e.,t... ~.""I" . ~'>'~"']~"l:1.\. ,", i' '..It "'.~
~~~~'{f?~~'~"~.~~'\::..: t.J(~;.;~~" ~ " ~.:}.~\ ':.~ :.:". . . .
~~V;'}'I~;~~~/~t~~\~"f)L~rf.:~..:.. ~\ ...., ~r. ;. ~ . ~. ) .
~f.(':1~c.-;'l"'~~~"!""""tt'::':i'" 'i1~Jr~..)f., .,J".~I'" " '"1', . ~.'" .. .
fW:tt"i%"'i/;A.~:Jt~.n..,~~~~;~t;~l{':~:;tI::~(.;{'..:.j~.r'i' '{'," f' ',',' ,'.
"T~':(' ~r.' -t"' "y..... h~.!l"": ......, .', \'H. I. . - .
ixtli;t,....~<.~;II)~/~-...::r.';j~\{,;r,.~I.;,.'.',.,.':....."'; '.-, .,... ': ,': ,~ . .,'.. (
. . ~' \r:r~'~.;,)j ~~;'~'.J.u",(':..;y ~:f,':.,:, . ., ,. ,." ' ,.\ " , , ..' .., . ,
. ,,'" .";!..'?...._~ ~~\-........,., .;......~J'l. 'i.;" ";1/" ..:~,.> ." ". '., ", ',' .
'. . , , .". ~*\%~W<~~~;i~l~~i~~\;!,;;j;!;,~;i;,~;) ,(: ,~;':.u ,';:,' '.',' ",; '::'( .... .. ,:'>,; '" ,:, '," ',' ':' ,':
~t..~,'4t..,-<",f~m:V:~~FI~~'~''''~'I''lJ"\~'\I~J''''J~......,\t,'I';.~~'1(4). ,", .1, ',1' .:", "{'to. '~.... .~~,: ......"...,.............+!. .....",. , ,...~',
,:l{\y:t.w..~"".. 1 ~ ~ IJ.~,.,,~" ~'.l.... '1."~ J,"; . ._,~.'" . 4,. ~. . . j' "" .... r ~ 1 .... ~.. ~. .. , ',. ' .J'
ftL..~~..,,.~~ (\~ .;;Cl.~..>..t\:'lf,.r ....,...+.~...I./~. .,....,...'1.'., '. ,"q. >~.T, .'.'~ d. ...J~t....~..'I..,~... .,....1... "t \, ..~
~~!;~~!.-~!y.L {.';tt~~~~~;(''',r~$;-::~.;;...''al:i~..I::!.~::~.;.~~I........~~ I;...';..~.., ~".\.'", ~'. .:/.'>.~.."~:::..t:1.:..~.i~ \'~:' .:.;.'" !~. ... ':.- ,
.~~.~M.~....-.-}'1.~..."!'~;I!"';.~; ,'ttt\:~.>t~:("~,~~'/,{'l"""=":Pi..,,...:"...'\:~.:..t'f'\':'".:"''': '~4' " '-", ..... ;/., ~ ,,' . "..1 .... ...' '1.,", '." . .
. .'
o
~
..
~
n
35.10, ~ ~ Ordinances.
2. A spacial exception is an exception from the .,
general provisions of a zoning ordinftnce contained in the'
ordinance itself that is permissible unless shown to be contrary
to the public interest. Section 163.170(6), Florida Statutes
(BUpp. 1980). Under the zoning scheme adopted by the City of
Clearwater, some 25 districts have been established for the
purpose of classifying, regulating and restricting the uses of
property within the City. section 3.01, ~ of ordinances:
The property in question herein lies within District CG (General
Business District), for which a number of special exceptions
have been authorized. Section 23.03, Code ~ Ordinances. As
is pertinent here, it includest inter alia:
(1) Storage yards. When shielded from view
from any public way (wall, solid fence and/or
screen planting) .
3. In zoning cases, it is incumbent upon the applicant
seeking a waiver from zoning regulations to show that all conditions
necessary to qualify for the special exception have been met.
Oldham v. Peterson,
So.2d
, Case No. 80-439 (Fla. 5th
DCA Opt filed 4/29/8l). Once this showing af compliance has been
met, the burden then shifts to those opposing the change to
demonstrate that the proposed use would adversely affect the
public interest. Rural New Town, Inc. V. Palm Beach County, 315
Sa.2d 478, 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Oldham, supra.
4. Section 35.09(7), ~ of Ordinances, enumerates
eleven factors that must be considered, where applicable, in
~ considering requests for special exceptions. Further, it is
necessary that the proposed use be "consistent with the intent
of the Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and with the pUblic
interest. II Section 35.09(6), Code of Ordinances. Here the
city has conceded that the intended use is consistent with the
'. .Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance (Testimony of Richter).
,. . :. t~.. I
"';'-:;':~;~"" 'HOwever, no party has made specific reference to the criteria
'~~. .~~ I'."'>":'~~):, .. .\.". .
~(/;:.:"',>,,,::';: :;:' ;,~~~~rat:ed in Section 35.09 (7), supra, in their evidentia~y
~t1.i'\~ffi:BiG;~~:A::": ';. . ..
~~'4.~1;;:~~i~:i~~~;r~~l~)l..;..~~~~.i~'1:\111':~Lf'" '.'.T'~~ .,'....
~tfJ)~~'(,~{'l (,:..~~.,(.~~r'/~;:~"".I,~,:':;:I~'""""" "" .'
} .. 1,,1''t1::it. u.lv/!.;.i.....t'~(.i~.ij.'J..I.,.f'" .~.!. .'
. ~?}::'l\~~~tw;~l~~::~;i~~:~~~~~:;,:;~~.:~,'..".~.\.:\~i~ ','" :;.\,:.'.,. ~ ~ ..... .
.~1oi.t.nY'\~ "~.?-~~/.~., ~;~}\:','J ~.~ "; , :.~ rl."',' . I". ," CS)"" '.
. '; r~r/~';iJ.~;~~!:'!f:,~~~;{~:,t:~1:,:~~>\;>:'~> ~';:"'::';,'::~ ...>,'1.;: ">,:,~~ ," :'~. ,,: '!':"",:"::.,~,: .
, w~Ot~~\t..:;~h;';l/:;;~/:' /:[:: r~';,,:,V:;'>:.'i.:' ;:1';\-' ~ '.:: ::, :: '. '
....:,. ......- .....l:l'-1......~."A-~,'t:.......!;.'...-yf~'..:~.I...~.:I....~:':'~.('. ...~rh ~ .~,.1. "I~, "
, '
, , ,
, ' : ~ \" ',". c I < c " .
. .
. ~ ~. '~
"
. .'
,',
,.--
..; ., 1,~.
.'1 .
" .
'. ~ '
','} ,
. ,.
Q
,8
presentations or argument. But it is apparent from a ~eading
,(S> of the criteria that only paragraphs (e) and'(k) are of any
significance to:,the case at bar.!! They require that consideration
be given to the following:
(e)' Screening and buffering with reference to
type, dimensions, and character.
A
'$I
'.e.
.
.
.
(k) That the use will be reasonably, compatible
with surrounding uses in its function, its hours
of operation, the type and amount of ,traffic to
be generated, and building size and setbacks, its
relationship to land values, and other factors
that may be used to measure compatibility.
Paragraph" (e) 'imposes a'requirement that screening .and buffe'rinq be
used where circumstances so dictate. Here the character of the
proposed use of the land is such that screening and buffering
is clearly desirable. However, the Code itself requires that in
order fdr a storage yard exception to be granted, it must be
"shielded from view from any public way". Section 23.03(l),
~ of Ordinances. That being so, any grant would necessarily
be conditioned upon meeting this ancillary requirement.l1
In essence, paragJ:aph (k)'requires that--the use be
"reasonably compatiblell with the surrounding neighborhood.
Petitioner testified that the storage yard would merely' be'an
adjunct to an existing used car lot that has been in operation
for some 20 years and would not disturb the general character of
the neighborhood. Moreover, ~etitioner asserts that it will
not engage in any undesirable activities such as salvaging
operations and the storing of junk cars. But the Petitioner
concedes the storage yard would simply be an extension of the
used car business, and a place where older cars would not only be
. '. "y 'The other criteria pertain to traffic flow, offstreet
'.parking and loading, refuse and service areas, utilities, signs,
.yarc;1s.and,open space requirements, height, landscaping and
_,~\,.'. ?; '.' .:': }::eriewal' and/or' termination dates, none of which are of any
\'1'Y:; ',; .. ,~.': ','. .' 'particula'r significance ~n resolving the request herein.
{~~i:;l~~'l.f ,t.: ~ :>..' , . '; ..... _.,. . " F. .,l" ~ "~.'. .'. . .'. .. '. . . .' ,
tt~::~~~g;r':;;r"~::"":,,:' ':>'., ..}I':.The :t:ap~~ of ',the 'Bo'ard hearing, which have. been made a
{i~~t" '<:;'Jitt~>.': ~;' pa~~, ,f~f.. ~is ,~ec.ord, indicate that pet~ tioner agreed to conform,
1~~~~)~t<(:w1~~~~~~~~ie~din~ requirements that m1ght be imposed under the
~~'I'''I~..:,;'~lL~,~d~. ':,', . .,. .': " .
~"'<{~r:~:t.~r~~~~:~'i'J,";'~:<~:';!';~"~1/ \:I."~':... . " .~: , . , '. .'
.IJ;f.('r.~~J~" ,-' )'V.'L+~~' 'J ~...' , . . . '" .'
, ..
.' '~r.i;{(l~l,.\:l~~~'"i~.L\""t;~.\,.: I~;l"/"~"i~"" ~~:},\ ',f ....'} :.""'.~,.' _ .}.~ ;(.:.. ' '. t;t; .~~J~}.:.) ;.....:;t..,:..,("......~";",.)J~;,~...t 1: ~~..r:,
'., "'''I'(~'>4'': .;,.i(O(I';~. .".1'.'" '\.~.rt' .~.. .". .~ ,', . "- J .. -. . ." .
" . .. .. ....
~
Q
refurbished for resale, but also an additional display area.
~ Thus, the operations on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 would be integrated,
and in essence the entire area used for the purpose of selling
automobiles. To extend the used car business itself t~ Lots
6 And 7 would violate the terms of section 35.08, ~ of
Ordinances, for it would constitute an enlargement of a
nonconforming use (used car sales) which is otherwise prohibited
in District CG.~ That Section provides in part:
(a) Within the districts established by the
Zoning Ordinance...there exist...uses of land
...which were lawful before the Ordinance was
passed or subsequently amended, but which would
be prohibited or otherwise restricted under the
terms of the Ordinance or its future amendment.
It is the intent of this Ordinance...to permit
these legal nonconformities to continue until
they are removed, but not to encourage their
survival or replacement. It is further the
intent of this ordinance that such legal
nonconformities shall not be enlarged upon,
expanded or extended, nor be used as grounds for
adding other lots, structures, uses or
characteristics prohibited elsewhere in the same
district.
@)
Because the operations on Lots 4,5, 6 and 7 can be considered as a
single entity if the request were granted, Petitioner actually seeks
to extend or enlarge a nonconforming use which is prohibited by
the Code. Section 35.08, supra. Accordingly, the applica~ion must
be denied.
DENIED.
\~l;::,~':':".:f/ ' "
1_.:{'};";::>:". ;: '... ,V A nonconforming use is a use that lawfully existed before
:i,:>,;)',!.;'(,:....., ".:- the,:enac~~t:of,'a ,zoning ordinance and that is permitted to
::~'('..~;:;:~\.r~:'..,>-:,'..'reaairi 'after,'the', effective date of the ordinance, even though it
w:.:.:,.~:':::,:.~<::..'.d~tI not. "comply ,withttle restrictions in the ordinance. . .
~~~~~,&~~~l;j(:'~",ei}:;r::',: ... ...... ..',' .' . .'. . . .
f~ij.{~:?8l~f,~~rI1;~f~~ J~:'r:.t,;/~:~:, ~'.'~'ir\ :!~(.. '. ','. " ~ ,
t*'i..!.'I".:~tt~"-...1~i~)~iV'...l..f~. . J"''';;'J~r':/....~.' t ......"~ . " ,
~ ~~?~rf-.....~(t;r.....t...!~.~...,.~': '.....~~ ,:'., ,',to.":.: I, ~~.. '"';. ~', . " L'. ',' '._. ;. . > I
, , ,. ,','~' " !t " }:llf~ilt~f~&~~~ir1;(~I~}~;,Jit;:~lj~;"r,:,~(;\";,,:ziJ~";:~/'}:"~:;'::::;,::ii~,";J.;,<'\:>.
~ 'j~.
..c~ . '''''.
, '
e,
"'~
~';, \fl\V
:.'.&
0<..
. T.. .
"
i
6
. ,,' ~
" l'
.\
J .
I_'~H! 1!,J'.t\;" :'Y:' """:.,,,1; ',"I,.. ,.." ,,'. "." ...' '.", . .' '. ' '. . " ". : ,;. " . .>", ',':' .. ',L.- . '." ".'. ".' " ,
\ ,\:,11;. ~f.-lj't..""'.J':"j .1:t~~n,Jct'-'~r\' ~~.r~t"."l".l'> ".<--.'+' -J,".' . '. '.'; ~.. Ii, '., .~, 'I' " ~.] T...~......t~... '.
. , '\~ifi~iJ&~~~[;t~,:,k;i};:'iHi{~:..);<" .. "" . ";'<>: ,;:..:{(~:::/{~{~;..,:(;:'f:'/'
'1t.....~I~:l\~..jit~1k.;"',t rl~:,./ ~ .",",'. ':~' .t..tiiL.I~:"~, SJ.,h. ". .".~. r~'> .. ;0' . .... ,~I.' : 'I ': ~ '1'r-Jl'~i1~.:~~ l+.~"'... ."'~:~~.,:.>. d'..2~\
~qR~ {~~G~f~;~~1'~{~:~:;,!~~!:1;:;,:;'~~%~(!.~(~.~; :;;: '~,\ :. .f,,;~,:~:;; <{:'. ~:,:~ ,',:, ~ ~ .:': "::~ > :;,:i:};':<;~ t;. ~~~'::~ii}{Y:'f;;~' \::t~<;:~ ~:;,~ ~',~;.~::~~;/f:,::.'~l1~~~
.'Ie,pr':' ;:;r.;t.' \,.,,\. fl,.,'. _<,.+1;', \", , ,'"11'" '+,'1 .,," ,.', -, .~","", '~"'. -,. ,j-" .'~", ,': ..,.','.', p,"
I~i.f'''' { :;IL' 1t:~ '. rt\'.~'\~~~~t.+-t~~ . '::.~ .l.~{i.. Ll~I;. ...........;. ,.,:.r~./ ~t',.~ l.:~"}i. '~..'"'' ~'t-;' i /. ~ ,~L ~l'... 'i/,~ ~~"... ~,"':'. .~....~~,.~ 1:..:;-
~ ~ ~.~+'~t1""'l')~tt-~ . ::. \, (y ;'\' .7' ~..1 'I....,'J...... ~ -i.}, ,:.:U, ~ \ 1; ; ,'e:, \ ..h.~"'L"'!"~! ;,:.:~ }~I~~ },;:r~~~t.'.&I~ ~ ..~,.'. it ~"'t.\ -: .: I:' " ~ .~; ..: '~. '. \~> :! t,f~~....
'III ~ f....:L.Y......r}.$)F~Ii!r \ ~I ',I,.,. :.....-,'1..,.~~.., ~r-~ ~4, 1.'. t~. "":r"..'!~";l ..~t:"'~o;:"" '1'''''')'1-... .' t.::r..'...~ r ,. t,~. \l,..::.t ....... ~~ .":..': i. .10........
';~tfj~(~);t>\~~I~t:;j~,.:t::~~n~~~,:!~Y{;~(~ll$~Z~r}~~1~Pj~~y~~r.~~i,:~~~i~~~:i1Ai\t!};t.
''ri'" "'1'f"">e~'h' ~':I,';>":"1;'\'~..h.lP"J."" ~' ..j up.:"",_ ....;jl' ...!W"~..,,>,, ,n 'Y""')i""'~ ,."',
li:. ~'r.?1 ~:J:~~;)~A.;(~;1.f ;~~tU~fi!1~;.J:;\~t6!j,~::;c-)t}~~ t;1\t~ t'f.~ 'J~ij.~~ '::'f~ K;!;t~;~f~~!h~ ~~ ~ r:~~~t. ~~~'''''' \\. ~~{~ \(
OONE'an4 ORDERED
, . 'f
Tallahassee, Plorida.
this ~ day of July,
1981,
in
Copies furnished:
Hearing Officer
Division of Adminis rative Hearings
The Oakland Building
2009 Apa1achee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of~the
Division of Adm6l1tstrative
Hearings this day of ;'
July, 1981. ' . .
Mr. James L. Hennagir
I Red Door Motors, Inc.
,1007S. Fort Harrison Avenue
',Clearwater,. Florida 33516
Mary,Rose Saporito
612 Jeffor4 Street
Clearwater, Florida
ThomaB A. Bustin, Esquire
City Attorney
C1ty of Clearwater
p~ O. Box.4748
Clearwater, Florida 33518
Harry S.., Cline, Esquire
P. O~ 'Box 1669 ,
Clearwater, Florida, 33517
Leslie M. Conklin, Esquire
430 Lotus Path,
Clearwater, Florida
Lucille Williams, City Clerk
City of Clearwater
P.' O. Box 4748
. Clearwater, Florida 33518
I'
0,
0'. c
,', I
-I- ,',
"[ '~'~'~'I'"~~, '
I
I
;, :~r
. .' ~ ~
, >
";' .........
",.,' .
. I ,~
-
. "'. ,,/:t
TABLE OF CONTENTS
" . ~ ,
~. ": ~.:
, . ~... . , ,'.. '. l . <~. ..
...." . c I. . ,.., ;:.' ~~ .
'.1'
PAGE
. .~~.'
" ):::::': '~::)~. >,
, ;
, :
'.
.. ~. . ~. ~
:',/.~ ;,' ~>.~.-::~.!~:..)i.:/.. ,',
. . > ~ . ", ,'. " c ,
.>". '<. ':,~
~ ". ..'
_ 'T<.."
CITATIONS
OF; AUTHORITY
L
PREFACE
2,
.c:;
: ' - ',I ~:~ ~E" ~"~:~~'\'..>
. ..; ,':, ~:; ':',}:.;:
,I
'.~: 3, .\~ "~".' :::
.' , '\' 'I'
'4, '.> .~r')ltl~>-:~.!"c
~\ ..'
, 5 . ';~.,:.
'" :' ' ,: :; :/:.
.. I" . ... D':, ~ l J .. ~.
6. 7, .~8'",,~( .,-.'
.r,'
,.~'f. "'~, :
\ t.", :.
10 .'...,,~jJ\ '.::.:'~'
/.(...'
../ "
~ ,;;..'. /: \ '.
9.
",.
'STATEMENT' OF. THE CASE
: ./.
. " J,
STATEMENT .OF ',THE FACTS
QUESTION PRESENTED.
., ",
,ARGUMENT
CONCLUSION
,..CERTIFICATE' OF 'SERVICE
, "
, ,
,"
( .
,., '.~ '
"
.j....
.." .'
:\
,:,:fD,
':.
. "
;- ~ ," . .'
:'
r .
1/"
. .
',.
. !
'.\
....;.
','!
. ~. ..'
I,
, ;!
I',>
.," ..
l; ~. .. : : . .
.~,;: ,: ,::1:/:,>/:,..::::'
.'
, ..
",
, ""'
, '
, I
,,'
"
.. ~.. .. ..
.'j!
'p' ."~::~'cc,\:>-' .~.~.:."
~ . i~ ..' .
."
',.
, "
, '.
',_, ,1 _
'.,,>.,' jc :"l:r{
. ~',
'1
},~,
'. .
, '0'
, ,
I
1
,\
:.'
.. .~, . ~.rl
+ ....<
.0.: . :.:
"
," ."
-
: i
:-. ,(,
.T!,
CITATIONS OF AUTHORITY
~ i,'
'.: \ .
" ,
'f,,"
.,
, PAGE./"
~ {.
; . ~ c
; I ~,
, ,
>\..
I'"
~. ,c
.f i .
,RURAL NEW TOWN INC. v. PALM BEACH 'COUNTY.
315So...2d, 478, 4th DCA.' 1975. .
'.8
,,'
. .
.,.....
.t'l
c ..=>
': IT
'. '. ,'i'- ' ' . '
.'
c/ -'r \'
'. ~'~ '~;'
L ~:. .: (
.;~ '...
i:.
"
0" <
':
.. .' . ~
~:/:1-:( I"
. . i c >+,'
'\
, ,
.',
"- . ~ -..
.. "
: ~ .
,
'.' t . ~
',",
: '
,., "I. ,"
.',
,',
"
'.' :."
.,',
I,
, ,
....
""j,"
','
'l .;
',l' ::~I' '..
. :"J:
1,
".., ~;,'
.. ",I
;1'
,", <"'r
J "I ~ . ~
,',
',=-I ~
,.
r
.: ~ ' l " ,"
I.
c .
'~;'a;"""i
;c... ~: .
.1," .
"r'
. '
,-j',': 'I, ':,
'I'
",'.
. ~, ,
'. :: . ,r ~ t
. !~.: ';\
....
.,
>~ ~
Ii.
: . > t ..' J > ~
,. ,
,:
_, 1, ,
.', ;.
. ~. .
....(
( :.
'"
Ie
. ,j:<,:,;::~:.'J.;"~'< :',...,:<:::
c'
. ~ ... ~
, .
\ ~"'; , .
. .
\. : '~~.:' 'c,::. .~. , . '~." . ~ :':'" J ,"
v
J.. "
'+';
;"
," .',
c ~ ;;~.::. :;.....;.. "r~' ':, '.:':::>:, T;~::.::.,'
\ ;~"'..~;-t::~. /'. .; T: ~.. :" "._
'. '
"
'~ ..;
. " < . T~ ._. '. ;. . ~
.....,..;~:~~~ 'I ~t
~ .~~ < ~L"I~'..~" .
" .,'
'c~~. \..' '.
.' ,
,
., '
. '~.' ." ". . .
~'.:c :""l"'~~'I. :' ..:;./~~.......,'..h,.,
,,',
. p' :
,
" .~ . ,
, + ,. ..
.,....
,~. ,
,+ , I"
'. ': ~ " I~". ,'.
" .
I
I
.1:
,.'"
c.... . \ ~.: ~ >
.,
" ~
-,
e'
....., .
. I;
'/'
PREFACE
~. ;,...'
"':'
..1.... .:
',".
Appe~lant,'MARY SAPORITO,
, , ) .,1..' . .
Appell~e',',: CI'l'Y' OF CLEARWATER, will be referred
will,be'referred t~,as
"Appella~t'! ;.:.
'. ",
'. ~
.'.\ ,
to ,as ',t~ppellee',~',: \
.. ~ .
" .-
,;
'. '
. '.
-:;""';'(:'.:.
. ;~. ~~ .; ".:
,'.,,'; ,/\ ~!y,:: ':.
-'.1 ."
, '
",le It.'.
'; "r'.
I,.', :c,
'I
'> ,~ .
'., ,1
. . ~ J .
.:',,',;,1:
~ . ",
. .
>-..... .
.':/' ,.';<
'. ~'
, '
'.
"
,
~. ..'
",r,"'
.1,",
"
, ~J
.i"
, . ~. ',~
,';\'
"
," ....
, \'<',
. I '.>:
" ',+:;:.:."
","
.:/ .l"
c', .
" .
'~~'. '
'I'
:'
'1., >,
': 1'"
:'I.~;
t"
"
.' ,"
~: ~ ': :' ".: "'1.' .
, ~. '
....
.1
'0, ..'
.i,
'", "
l\{C;
.' ~
,'e
\
'J, ",'
....\
h ,':'
,',
. ,
,,- .
".:. ~.. //.'
" ",'"',
!, ~-
, ,
, ,
.\'
,"
'.. ': 'I','".' I :.':;,~ ,:",
.' ~
"I
. .;~ .~'t~::~Jc':
~; .. .. ,. i .,. .
.~. ~ :.' +:1 . . c
" :', q
, . ~.. I >
.:' II
" :t,
, '.I'
.' < ~ .
',<,
>,' ;
~~~ ~ ,t:,,;
',\
,',
: . ~;/}" :c:!
~.
":, ")j:.\. ~:<:{\';:\'
. ~,
.' '/r. . ,'<," 'I,
T. P ....
., ,.
:i :;,:::~~/
: ,< I ,~
,', "<"~'.'i::~~J '~-;;'~ '"
.,"
_+'" .
,,0
: .1
','
. ' ,
" .
'.: ,',' ...
I
,I,
.,
'. ~:- l ;: ," .
1 "'.
, ,
~ ':.
:.:i,.",
e
"':',
The best
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
,)
summary oft8cts is prepared
\,'
. \. . ~.\ < .
in his
"findings
of fact" :made part of his
.' 1-. :. .' . ..'': J:. ,> ~
by t~e. Hearing,,6f~ic~~-::. ~ ~
,.,..' T' I I......
'..<'. L' .
Final or,der 'of "Ju~'Y".'29, ~'\'
,'.
.'. .
'L <'.,
; "/":: .,
.... ';,
':'
1981. .,;
.... "
. 'l. ::"~
'.
,.
.:: r.. .
.'.')
,,' ~
. ,
. /'.
",,-
~ I: ~:;..;o : ;. ;' : . -:
~ ~ > \
.; .~ i:;. ~ ::.~,
", I
,< . ~.
:\.i. ,,' .1>"
'.' . I. '> t .
,">l:"il
" 'I'
, {~'. !. I ~:' ~
(
, ,
, : \
.,..;,;.;..,".' .
~ ,," ~
. >: ~ '
.- ,'j,
iT.
J~~'~'~ . ,
.: .. ~', : . . 'I ~ ~.:, ;'.",
.c' ',(:y.!' "I
:..,
'.~ '. T ",
", 1\ . .:
,.
~. .:. .''':.~'. )
" .
. .
. . .
,I" "'
. :'j.'..
" ~.
"!.
. "
'C-:',
.: I ~t i:~' r:?:' ~
q :~...
" "':.
',,>,
I..'
",.'
~; : ,:\ ...~ ,:c". :. .
. 1 '" 'J.
, ,
.,
\,..."
\ ','
':
,. \ ~.
:, .
>:~~> :"j
. r '.~_r .
"',k
",'T"
. :~... c. _: \
I ~'
.'r'
i w; ... .j ~ :" . '; .
~. , {>
",L. I':'
"
:. .~, ; ~: ~:. :.:, > >' ; ~. "
."'~' "
'.:'e,
"
....,. ,'.
',,'
'.,.:"
;(:~:',: ':
'1 e
. .,~ .
..' '.
. l'. //
:'
" :
..,.....1
, ' . ~
. . .
: .'~, < ': ')'".:
,c. I," ' . .::: r' . " ~ r .., ,
'.
, '
.',
'.,
,~ " ,
.' , i\' ,; .,:.' ,','.:',; ':"""/~":':::':";',:",':",'i::",':':",~\,,~': :,:,;.;..:/1:':';\',,:.':,','::..,:....;::'1.';..:,:.,:. \, .
;'},'}:/;<:>" " . .. ':.
,!
."
'..',
:. ~..
., " "';"
, .; J
'"
"~',':':~,<):, :~;;c ?:,:;.~,::~ :.;"
<1
.'....,
"
',. r "
,)
'. .' l:
'.,'
1 ~ '; :'."
;;
, ...
.,' ,
. ".,' r
\"': J.,
I
I
:, .
e
QUESTION PRESENTED
"
"
IS ,IT ERROR TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION'
, ,
OF A CITY ORDINANCE TO PERMIT AN AUTOMOBILE STORAGE YARD
J - {
. .
ON T.H~ BASIS THAT THE .OPERATION MAY "BLOSSOM" INTO A RETAIL
,'DISPLAY AREA AND THEREBY BE PROH~BlTED UNDER ANOTHER 'ORDINANCE?
.; ~. ',: ,<
.,
, t '. ~
; .
,.
J
.;
. :.
, . ,,\
'},
. .',
;',
,.
:', \.
~ : . ,
J.
"',>.
.\
'.,
:"e
. .;.
. '."
.,',
. ,
'; . +' ~ ~
"
.,; .":,'
~... ", ~
,>
;.
. .
',I
j . ~ ,
," <; 'F
, ~ ~
'(
','"
" "
',... ',": .'>...
....3 .:..;",
~.~ :'. .
'!', "
I ~ . ~ . <
".)0 ,~
.:......
"
. ...
. . c...._~. ". . .
t.~.:/.,I{.~ .;. "'~: .~j'c:,'" 1~:' ~":
. . ,I <,!1,",;'~\,
:. ~.~:::;~;>
f.,".: .,
"
. ',....T.'
.,
. . ~ 7 'e 't~ '.'
-: <, t .
:' ,"
,)
,~ "
..'.
n n
e ARGUMENT
Appellant applied for a special exception for the purpose
of operating an automobile storage yard, 'not an enlargement of
a used car business.
However, the Hearing Officer of
Administrative Hearings concluded:
41
~'because the operations on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7
can be considered as a single entity if the
request were granted, Petitioner actually seeks
to extend or in enlarge a nonconforming use .
which is prohibited by the Code. ,. (Section 35.08,
Supra.) Accordingly, the application must be denied. It
Appellant here contends that it was improper for the
Hearing Officer to assume that Appellant was seeking to expand
his used car business particularly when the application for the
special exception was specific in its request to operate a storage
yard facility.
On Page 6 of the Final Order, the Hearing Officer states:
"But it is apparent from a reading of the criteria
that only Paragraphs (e) and (k) are of any signifi-
cance to the case at barr."
(e) Screening and buffering with reference to type,
dimensions, and character.
(k)
That the use will be reasonably compatible with
surrounding uses in its function, its hours of
operation, the. type and amount of traffic to be
generated, and building size and setbacks, its
relationship to land values, and other factors
that may be used to measure .compatibility.
'"
", \\
. ~ I ,. t .
~. J
" ".
'. 'With
to these two requir~ent8, the Hearing Officer
the first requirement would be met by Appellant
"
. . > : f . ;.,.) ._,
. u;