Loading...
02/22/1979 , .. .1 .~. ..1"-'.;' "r'~"- , ., , , , \ '.'!,' d.\ -, ... ........, i............:..... ~;.. ~ . ~.~, t'...'".\'+~ '. + '''~~' ~'... ~~ ...." ~ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL ON ZONING February 22t 1979 @r,~ ..'I :;~\'l ~ ' Members present: Edward 11. Nichols, Chairman Frank Donnell, Vice-Chairman Harold J. House l~ade 11. Gans Frank H. Morris, Jr. Also present: Syd Snair, Building Official Mike Kenton, Planning Official Frank Kowalski, Chief Assistant City Attorney Sue Lamkin, Assistant City Clerk ' The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 3:00 p.m. in the Commission Mecting Room in City Hall. He outlined the pro~ cedures and announced the request of Dolphin Cove Condominiums (R. Meeks) to build a Type A marina. The BUilding Official stated the proposed marina abuts the Dolphin Cove parking lot and is across the bay from a commercial marina. If the request is granted, he suggested a provision be made for the eroded area between the parking lot and the seawall. The Planning Official stated the activity would not be harmful to the water body and the application has been approved by the Marine Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Boarel. The Chief Assistant City Attorney requested the record reflect he is a resident of the Dolphin Cove Condominium. Neither the applicant nor his representative was present and the item was continued until later in the meeting. ITEM HZ - Request of C.P.C., Ltd. for side and rear setback variances. , John P. Crist, representative, outlined the history of the cpn zoning at the time u.S. Ilome annexed the propertYt and stated it was given a CP designation. The state and U.S. Home entered into an environmental agreement which restricts this particular property to office use, and the deed restrictions so state. He displayed drawings sho,dng the proposed use, which is less intense than permitted and will provide more green area and better parking turnaround. ' No one spoke in opposition. Upon consideration of the appeal of C.P.C.t Ltd. from the decision of the Building'Official concerning the request for vari~ ances, to ,permit construction of 2 office buildings upon a.0.762 acre parcel of Countryside Tract 45, Section 30-28~16, WhlCh pro- , . perty,. is loc-~ted at the Southeast corner, of Countryside Boulevard .: ~ :' .,," '. . \' ., . ' ' : c}', '~ L ~' ','".,', I '. '.... I'... c., , 'I . l~f~;/~; ~r;,:;:{';,;\:,~}'~:'~~ :,:,',:~., ,,'::',';\,' ,,:;,;:,,' "", 1. 2/22/79 , , , " ' ... ~":~!~.'t,~ ?" ~:\>~'~~:""rr ..~~~tt.~~'r' c~ : , ' ,(, e , r,'" ,1 ....: . po" >',~:.~~;~1. ",-"--~~,;t~'! ~Je1 . ~ ,... ",~.: ;~ ',' (t) , ". :" . , ( , / .\ _~~e::otr..-:t.-:::.."~---.........' . .:___'_~.b.i"_':""~~":~:._~;_' ,.t ~,'.k ~ ~~. . ,., and Enterprise Drive, West of the Ramada Inn and is zoned CP (Parkway business), it appearing, after this duly constituted public hearing, that there are practical difficulties or un- necessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of the zoning ordinance as it affects such property and that the same can be varied in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance, ~Ir. House moved that such appeal be ~ranted in accordance with the applica- tion submitted therewith, with the provision that the right to obtain a building permit in accordance with such variance shall cease after six (6) months from this date. Mr. Gans seconded the motion which carried unanimously. ITEM H3 - Request of George Catanzaro for a p3rking variance. The Building Official advised that a special exception for automotive repair was granted on May 27, 1976, on the South lot of this property. At that time, a retail store was in operation on Lot 2 with parking provided on Lot 13. Since then the retail store has gone out of business and the garage remains in business. The owner wishes to separate the two lots and to have a dance studio on Lot Z with no parking available except public parking. The only daytime activity would be the giving of dancing lessons, with a minimum number of people present at one time. 1\'.II. '~olfe, Attorney, reviewed the overall downtown parking problem and suggested it is the City's problem rather than that of the business establishments. 1~ stated other businesses in the downtown district have been permitted to change usage without meeting current parking requirements and feels his client should be accorded the same right. The Board expressed concorns about the possibility of setting precedent in the downtown core relating to parking and the loss of control on this particular property if the parking variance is granted. The Building Official pointed out that many of the businesses which have changed usage did not have parking available and were permitted to change without providing parking, whereas parking had been provided previously in this case. In response to a question, Mr. Kowalski advised the Board that they do have the jurisdiction to grant or reject the applica- tion setting any conditions they choose. Further discussion ensued concerning the desirability of establishing policy of eliminating parking requirements in situa- tions of this kind and, in response to a,question, the Building Official stated he felt the City Commission would have established a policy restricting the Board's authority in this regard if that had been their desire. Sam Casella, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Board, spoke in support of the application stating that the Board had discussed this matter at their last. meeting. and expressed no opposition. ,No one spoke in opposition. ;*;;~:;':,-:? ~,,;..,..,. ,'. ."."".. 2 . 2/22(?9' '.. .' '.. ,;, . , " , '0 : 'I~ . r '.,~i':.' ,'" ".;:'t'".,,;:,~\ :.: ';~::','.::h:;';'t.\ ,'," -.. . '; , t, ,.'.'~.. p'...... .r'-'" t-..........'-~..".,..,.~"I.:.J 'T~ .~~":r'r "II~ lrr':'W'~ t~ J , , ~' ,~". ,p 'e"e.: _ , , . ( . ;, / ,. . ..___...............~ :;::...~ _....l.:~~: .;:~~.... f~.;.Iw4.:"':f. '--~ .; ... . 3c:;2~ Upon consideration of the appeal of George Catanzaro from the decision of the Building Official concerning the request for n variance of 5 parking spaces required for change of use of pro~ perty upon Lot 2, Block 20, Gould and Ewing's Second Addition, which property is located at 639 Cleveland Street and zoned CG (General business), it appearing, after this duly constituted public hearing, that there are practical difficulties or unneces~ ~ slary haT~s~ips inf tt1h1e waY,of cadr!ying out ~he sftfrict lcthter of t V t1C provlslons 0 c zonlng or lnancc as l.t a acts sue proper y and that the same cnn be varied in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance, Mr, Morris moved that such appeal be granted in accordance with the application submitted therewith, with the provision that the right to obtain a use permit in accordance with such variance shall cease after six (6) months from this date. Mr. lfuuse seconded the motion. Mr. Morris stated he is moving for approval of the request in order to at least maintain a status quo until the business community and the City Commission can obtain a workable agreement for the downtown area so the downtown doesn't decrease anymore than it already has. Mr. Donnell moved to amend the motion to require 5 parking spaces in the evening hours within 500 feet of the property. Mr. ~lorTis accepted the amendment. Further discussion ensued concerning the amendment and the effect it would have upon the operation of the business were the applicant unable to obtain an agreement for use of 5 parking spaces in the area. Mr. Gans asked that Mr. Donnell withdraw his amendment since downtown Clearwatet experiences no parking difficulties during the evening hours. ~Ir. Donnall withdrew the amendment. Upon the vote being taken to grant the request, Messrs. Nichols. House, Gans, and ~Iorris voted "Aye"; Mr. Donnell voted "Nay". 1-lotion carried. ITEM "4 - Request of Bay Painte 1'ol<lerS, Ltd. for a fence variance. I The Planning Official stated the plan submitted showed trees in the right-of-way ",'hich were not permitted, and they have been placed behind the sidewalk. lie will reserve comment concerning the fence until hearing how the fence will be placed in relation to the landscaping because of the nature of the landscaping. Carlton Ward. Attorney, stated the fence is needed to improve the esthetic value of the property and provide safety for the pool area. The property comprises a City block and has four fronts and they propose to put the cypress fence one foot from t~e sidewalk on Lurboard Way. west of the existing shrubbery. In response to a question, 'he said the owner would agree to place, the fence 3-1/2 feet from the sidewalk between the trees and the ,oleanders. " L ,c ~!;:t;:~!~:\~}';;~:;{"I. : ~ .'. . .' ........ " 2/22/79 , 3. :, /i. c :.:>>;'~~'7~' i. .',.r ..t.:~:}'>~': i:~ .',..,:T..".~, II ~ ' " ,.l,~ .~T~.""" '~, :;:~;:';:' .....,~........,....-4.;-~~~........... ~...~. ,~,.~ ''''., .... i~ " ~~ " ji< ...."'~....~....f.~......~+.:~/:.\.....:...:'., ,;..~, ....., . "~r,'~.... ,.~. :5 c9- J '@ The Planning Official pointed out tho oleanders li~UId eventually hido the fence reRnruless of whether it were a thirty~inch (30") or a 6 foot fence. Discussion ensued concorning the current fence along the South of the property, Mr. Wnrd stating it would possibly come down in the future since tho mmers hope to crect another building. There was furthc r discuss ion concerning the type of fence and whether or not anythinJt above the permit tcd thi rty~ inch (3D") fence is really nouuod in view of thc oleanders. Two residonts of Clipper Cove, representing 10 other owners also prasent, spoke in support of the request stressing the security factors. Five letters of support wore read into the record. , Three citizens spoke in opposition, each having also sub- mitted written ollpos.ltion. ^ letter in opposition from Soa Island Apnrtments Condo I Association wns rend into the record. In Rebuttal, Russcll Hurt, Apartment 906, Clipper Cove, remarked everyone scemed to be In agreement that a fence should be erected, the locution nnd type of fence being the problem. lie SURRostcd these differences could be worked out to the satis- fnction of everyono concerned. Mr. Kenton stated the Condo A5sociation should be aware of thei r resJlons i b11 ity for keeping vegetation from encroaching on the sidewalk. /fo said his Department will work with the developer to come up with nn acceptable plan. Mr. KO\iUlski cautioned the Hoard to provide as much specifi- city an possiblo in n motion to avoid unlawful delegation of powc rs . Mr. Morris moved that Item #4 on the agenda of Pebruary 22, 1079, bo continued until March 8, 1979, with the provision that tho devoloper, the Planning Department, and adjacont home or condo~ minium ownors across the street specifically, be included in the discussion t thut we 5 t rive for a fence no more than 6 feet high that is ndoqunto for protection of the swimming pool; that it occurs somowhere botween the patio and the property line, not necossarily in u straight line, looking specifically toward planting groups 50 that you get an undulating three~dimensional front l'athor than a hedge; using different plant material that is compatible wi th our climate and upkeep; that adequate watering facilities be included and necessary access to the planting a~eas oxterior or tho potio. Mr. Gans seconued the motion which cal"rieu unanimously. Nr~ Kowalski stnted no new application would be required sinco this is a continuance, not a denial, nor is there need of additional advertising. ITDN HS - Request of t.tichael Plunkett: (A) For a special exception for addition to a single~family dwelling to convort to duplex. 4. 2/22/79 . . , '~:-:-'~, .,..~ '., ~", ;~ , , : . ~I ' , '~ ~~.\_._':.. '!, " , ~: 4J.' , " ' .... '"- ~. -.-. ......" " 'J' , ' ";.,... ...-:._......."..~..,.AI~ ___-&~~ -.p , -.... ~ ~.\._.:,' " , " '- '\, " , '. ~ ~ ,! ,... ~ C! ' ~) ~'II _,:,..l~ P_'!l"~-r: .~'f ' . "