04/19/1994 (2)
. . " '. l " '; t' .'..;1. I' '. " , . .,' ,: '.
';;',
. .~:,' .~~ ',,:; .
ji~~~':"
'. :;: .~ '.' -,'
. -:. ,~".~ ,... .
......( 1
"'.'.',
~~~.~:\::,'
.;,r;~r'
t.. .
,2',...,.::.
;~.'_::'::'
H.....:....
t.:~.~.'t~....
i3'u',"'l~' .'
.\.-t _,
,:......."..1,:.:.
'1":,:.
. :1~lf;'~'
..~.....
~::~\\.':" .'
.~~.~:; ;":
DATE
COM
City
i ram c..
O/~1p
,;. -.;
'j
i
'j
'";.1
.1
15510N'
.:'<
ammission
'.'1
"
, ' ',~ ~..
r
ACTION AGENDA
City Commission Special Meeting
Sign Variance Requests
Tuesday, April 19, 1994 - 9:00 A.M.
ITEM A - Reconsideration of Thomas E. & Barbara E. Soares (EI Capitan Restaurant & Lou nge,
Inc) for a variance of 227.2 sq ft to permit 291.2 sq ft in area of attached signage to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 2525 Gulf-to-8av Blvd, Sec 18-29-16, M&B 41.04, zoned
CG (General Commercial). SV 93-05 - Denied area variance of 227.2 sq.ft. but approved area
variance of 26 sq. ft. to allow 90 sq.ft. of attached signage.
ITEM 8 - (cont from 3-7-941 Rex M., Stephen M" & Randv R. Barbas (R.J. Automotive) for
variances of (1) 1 wall sign to perm it a total of 4 wall signs; and (2) 132.4 sq ft of attached
signage to permit a total of 196.4 sq ft to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 830
Court 5t, Aiken Sub, Blk 10, Lot 6, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center (East). SV 93-87 - Denied 111;
regarding #2 - approved area variance 0142.35 sq_ft. to allow 106.35 sq.ft. of attached signs
subject to: the attached signage be made to conform in the event a freestanding sign is
placed on this property.
ITEM C - (cont from 3-7-94) Cenqiz Gokcen (Prime Executive Center) for variances of (1 ) 11
ft in height to permit a freestanding sign of 19 ft in height; (2) 22.7 sq ft in area to permit a
freestanding sign with an area of 46.7 sq ft; and (3) 1.2 ft setback from the required 5 it to
permit a freestanding sign 3.8 ft from a right-of-way (Drew 8t) to permit nonconforming
signage to remain at 2288 Drew St, Temple Terrace 1 st Add, Blk D, Lots 15, 16 & 17, zoned
OL (Limited Office). SV 93-92 .. Denied 1t1, #2 & #3, approved a height variance of 1.7 feet
to allow a freestanding sign 9.7 feet high subject to the condition that the sign area and
setback be made to conform.
ITEM 0 - (cant from 3-21-94) Valentinos Koumoulidis (Mr. Submarinel for varia nces oi (1)
24.5 sq ft to permit 88.5 sq ft freestanding sign; and (2) 13.17 ftin height to permit a total
of 33.17 ft high freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1010
Cleveland St, Sarah McMullen's Sub, Blk 3, part of Lot 9, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center (East).
SV 92-97 (revised application dated 3/26/94 and advertised 4/9/94) - Denied #1 ; regarding
#2 - approved a height variance of 4 feet to allow a freestanding sign 24 feet high subject:
all signs on this property conform to the area requirements contained in the code.
ITEM E - (cont from 3-21 -94) Richard O. Davison (Bay Area Neuro Muscular) for a variance
of 6.9 sq ft in freestanding sign area to permit a 70.9 sq ft freestanding sign to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1450 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd, Knollwood Replat, Blk 3, Lot 1 3,
zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-13 - Continued.
f
;
i
!.
ITEM F - (cont from 3-21-94) Arthur H. & Marv l. Bruno (Clearwater Mattress Co, Inc) for
variances of (1) 294.46 sq ft to permit a total of 354.46 sq ft of attached signage area; and
(2) one permanent window sign to permit 4 attached signs of the same lype to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1659 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd, Gulf-to-Bay Shopping Center, Lots
3 & 4, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-19 - Withdrawn by applicant.
I
I
1
~
~
~
if
f
'"
4/1 9/94
1
!
I
f
I
;':. :.:;;.,'...:~,-;t";;,,,:,'i\,.1,\~..-::;.,:~~',,;-:';;{:'},,:,,,;,~~.t- .' ;-
":... '. .,. .' I., :,! .:'..t ..'., .... " "t" '..... ,",,:".. ..:', ":;,'" . '1,':. .; I'~,~, "'" "-,. : ,...", . ,':', ".:, .... ..'.1 ....,..', .
I!"" ;
I
ITEM G - (cant from 3-21-94) Helika Properties (Clearwater Mattress Co, Inc) for variances
of (1) 15 ft to permit a freestanding sign 35 ft in height; (2) 2 above roof signs where such
signs are prohibited; (3) 12 sq ft to permit 120 sq ft of attached sign area on North face of
business; and (4) 150 sq ft to permit 229.5 sq ft of attached sign area on East face of
business to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 20258 US Hwv 19 N, Sec 1 8-29-1 6,
M&B 44.01, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-22 - Withdrawn by applicant.
ITEM H - (cont from 3-21-94) Marks & Gilliss, Inc/Marks Holdinq Co, Inc (Ken Marks Ford) for
variances of (1) 37.5 sq ft in area to permit a freestand ing sign of 149.5 sq ft; (2) 144 sq ft
in area to permit an auxiliary sign of 200 sq ft; (3) 8 ft in height to permit an auxi!iary sign of
20 ft in height; and (4) 18 ft in distance to permit an auxiliary sign with a distance of 282 ft
from the primary sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 24791 & 24825 US H\lVY
19 N, Ken Marks Ford, Blk A, Lot 1 together with Ken Marks Ford 1 st Add Sub, Lot 1, zoned
CH (Highway Commerc ial). SV 93-65 - Continued to 4/27/94.
1 . Charlie Harris Pontiac, Inc/Johnson Assoc., Inc for varia nces of ( 1) 2 freestanding sig ns
to permit a total of 3 freestanding signs; (2) 197.5 sq ft in area to permit total freestanding
sign area of 309.5 sq ft; (3) 17 ft in height to permit a freestanding sign of 37 ft high; and
(4) 15 sq ft of directional sign area per sign to permit 3 directional signs of 19 sq ft each to
permit nonconforming signage to remain at 19320 & 19246 US Hwy 19, N, Sec 1 9-29-1 6,
M&B 14.03 & 14.04, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 92-75 - was stated to Continue
to 5/16/94 but as public hearings on regular Commission meetings fall on Thursday dates,
item is continued to 5/19/94.
2. Sam C. & Judv Y. liu (Peking Palace) for variances of (1) 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign
o ft from property line; and (2) 3.5 sq ft each to permit 3 directional signs of 7.5 sq ft each
to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1608 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd, Lakewood Replat, part
of Lots 1, 4 & 6 together with all of Lot 5, zoned CG (General Commerical). SV 93-17 -
Approved #1 & #2 subject to: at such time as the directional signs are replaced, they shall
be made to conform to code, and by reconstructing a sign within the street setback pursuant
to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable
for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired bV eminent
domain for road widening or any other public purpose.
I
"
~
~
:1
,
~.
;
"
~
"
;,
l
~
"
"
!
]
~
~
"
i.
i
~
~1
"
J
i~
-'
"
:1
'.
Jl
~,
I
a ..~,~,.
l
;,
r
~
X
3. Aubrey Maclean, TRE/Clearwater Trust/Trizec Properties, Inc (Gayfers) for variances of
(1) 192 sq ft of sign area to permit a total of 342 sq ft of attached signage on east side of
building; and (2) 192 sq ft of sign area to permit 342 sq ft of attached area on west side of
building; and (3) a ratio variance of .027 sq ft of attached sign area per 1 .0 linear foot of
building width to permit a ratio of 1.527 sq ft per linear foot of building width to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 20505 US Hwv 19, Sec 17-29-16, M&B 32.01 & 32.02,
zoned CC (Comlnercial Center). SV 93-30 - Continued to 4/27/94.
~
B
"
~
f
f
4. Aubrey Maclean, TRE/Clearwater Trust/Trizec Properties, Inc (Dillard's) for variances of
(1) 21.26 sq ft of attached signage to permit a total of 171. 26 sq ft of attached signage on
the south elevation; and (2) 21.26 sq ft of attached signage to permit a total of 171.26 sq
ft of attached signage on the east elevation to permit noneonforrning signage to remain at
20505 US Hwy 19, See 17-29-16, M&B 32.01 & 32.02, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV
93-39 - Approved #1 & #2,
I
I
I
J
I
~
~
I
,
I
4/19/94
2
',r. ":.,-,,,
, . .,.;,.~\;~'r: ': j/~~.i ;');~~,'i~';.l:~.~;,:i.i1.~*k'~'J:;"~~''.: "-:()::t~'~i:J ;.{.;;., \', ~,
11 . Cynthia C. Jacobson (HCA Family Care Center) for variances of (1) 46 q ft to permit a
freestanding sign area of 70 sq ft; (2) 10ft to permit an 18 ft high sign; nd (3) 2.4 ft in
distance to permit a freestanding sign to remain 2.6 ft from a street right-of- ay (Belcher Rd)
to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2 Belcher Rd, N, Sec 13-29-15, M&B 11.18,
zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-02 - Denied #1, #2 & #3, given 90 da s to come into
conformance.
f'4,'~
5. David E. Edmunds (Spencer's Western World II) for variances (1) to permit a 3-dimensional
object (horse) used as a sign; and (2) of 9.7 ft in height to permit a freestan ing sign 29.7 ft
in height to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1884 Drew St, Ne Marymont, Blk
8, Lots 2, 3, & 4 together with west Y2 of vacated street to east, zon d CG (General
Commercial). SV 93-86 - Approved #1 & #2 subject to: at such time as the tl ree dimensional
object is removed by the property owner or irreparably damaged, it shall not be replaced and
the sign height shall not exceed the zone limit, and the area of the sign p nel shall not be
made larger than the existing 32 square feet.
6. James C. & Carolvn C. Johnson (Mac's Sports) for variances of (1) 187. sq ft to permit
251.3 sq ft of attached signage; and (2) 1 sign type to permit 6 attached sig ns to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 2126 Drew 5t, Mosel! Acres, part of ot 2, zoned CG
(General Commercial). SV 93-93 - Denied #1 & 1t2.
7. Pinellas County for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 3.3 ft in Iwight and 7 sq ft
in area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 631 Chestnut St, Magn< Iia Park, Blk 19,
Lot 1, part of Lots 2, 9 & 10, zoned UC(C} (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-98 - A.pproved.
~\ "
8. Laura N. Connolly, TRE &. G. Nail (Gulf-to-Bay Motel & Casa Ole' Restaura 1t) for variances
of (1) 1 freestanding sign to permit 2 such signs; and (2) 64 square ft to penT it a total of 128
sq ft of freestanding sign area to permit nonconforming signage to remain ,t 2950 & 2960
Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Sec 17-29-16, M&B 14.052 & 14.053, zoned CG (General ommercial). SV
93-104 - Approved #1, Approved #2 to allow 2 freestanding signs with the t tal area of 128
sq.ft. subject to: neither sign shall have an area exceeding 64 sq.ft or a heig t exceeding 20
feet.
9. Dan Douglas Enterprises, Inc (Fred Astaire Dance Studio) for a variance of 22.8 sq ft of
attached signage to permit a total of 70.8 sq ft to remain (Jones St) to permit nonconforming
signage to remain at 225 Ft Harrison Ave, N, Jones Sub of Nicholson's, Blk 5 Lots 8, 9 & 10,
zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-113 - Approved.
10. Directions for Mental Health for a variance of 3.7 ft in height to permit an 11.7 ft high
freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1437 Belcher Rd, 5, Sec 19-
29-16, Pinellas Groves, part of Lot 8, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-01 Approved.
4/19/94
3
.,', ~ 1>01
.'. ;:' _ ' , , ' ' ".' . ~' ..,.,,'~ ,..,' h . ~.' , ~ " '.'" " .... . ' . I, . . . . , .,' '. .' , . ".... ',,' " '
A~;"'.'
,.''''' .,
\
12. Carl Tillv, Inc (Drew Shopping Center) for a variance of 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign
o ft from N Arcturas Ave and Drew St rights-of-way to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 1891-1899 Drew 5t, Skycrest Unit #6, Blk E, Lots 1 & 2, zoned CG (General
Commercial). SV 94-03 - Approved subject to: by maintaining a sign within the street
setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency
shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is
acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public purpose.
13. WL T Software of Florida, Inc for a variance of 4.9 'ft in height to permit a 1 2.9 ft high
freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 831 Hercules Ave, N, Sec 12-
29-15, Pinellas Groves SE ~, part of Lot 8, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-04 - Approved
subject to: if the sign is changed, it will be brought into conformance with the code.
14. William W. Short, Jr. (Best Wallpaper) for a variance of 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign
Oft from S Belcher Rd right-of-way to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 300 Belcher
Rd, S, Short & Short Sub, Lot 1, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 94-08 - Approved
subject to: the sign shall be made to conform to the area and height requirements of the
code, and by reconstructing a sign within the street pursuant to this variance, the owner and
applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or
removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain for road widening
or any other public purpose.
I
tt
.~.~ ' ~. .
15. e.G. & Suzanne B. Gruver (Gruver's Chevron Service, Inc) for a variance to permit a
freestanding sign of 79.4 sq ft of sign area, a height of 23 ft, and located 0 ft from a street
right-of-way (N Ft Harrison Ave) where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at415 S Ft Harrison Ave, Court Square, Lots 47-51, zoned
UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 94-11 - Denied as requested but approved a variance to allow
a freestanding sign 21 feet in height, 45 square feet in area, with no setback from the S. Ft.
Harrison Ave. right of way subject to: by constructing a sign within the street pursuant to
this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for
the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent
domain for road widening or any other public purpose.
I
\
I
16. D. Guv McMullen Properties, Inc (Chevron Corner Mart) for variances of (1) 1 ft in height
to permit a 21 ft high freestanding sign; and (215ft to permit a freestanding sign 0 it from
street right-of-way (Edgewater Dr) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1901
Edgewater Dr, Sunset Point Replat, part of Lot 4 North of Sunset Point Rd less road, zoned
CR 28 (Resort Commercial). SV 94-12 - Approved #1 & #2 subject to: in the event any
regulated feature of the sign is changed, the Public Works Director shall review the change
to determine whether the encroachment into the right of way shall be eliminated, and by
maintaining a sign within the street pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicarlt agree
that no governmental agency sha!~ be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in
the event the property is acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public
purpose.
r
!
!
I
,~
Adjournment - 11 :59 a.m.
I
4119/94
4
,.,' >,',,,'./',.'':.,
".,.
4~' :,;..
," ,
CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
April 1 9, 1 994
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in special session at City Hall,
Tuesday, April 19, 1 994 at 9:00 a. m., with the following members present:
Rita Garvey
Arthur X. Deegan, II
Ri chard Fitzgerald
Sue A. Berfield
Fred A. Thomas
Mayor/Commissioner
Vice-M ayor /eom missioner
Co m missioner
Commissioner
Co m missioner
Also present:
Kathy S. Rice
Miles Lance
Scott Shuford
John Richter
Susan Stephenson
Deputy City Manager
Assistant City Attorney
Ce ntral Permitting Director
Se nior Planner (arrived 11: 1 5)
De puty City Clerk
Public Hearings were held concerning the following sign variance requests.
ITEM A - Reconsideration of Thomas E. & Barbara E. Soares (EI Capitan Restaurant &
Lounge, Inc) for a variance of 227.2 sq ft to permit 291.2 sq ft in area of attached signage
to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2525 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd, See 18-29-16, M&8
41 .04, zoned CG (General Commercial), SV 93-05
On January 24, 1994, the Commission approved a setback variance for the
freestanding sig n, but continued the area variance request of 227.2 square feet. The
continuance was to allow the owners the opportunity to consider downsizing the request.
Staff met with the applicants regarding this matter.
The Soares' are prepared to downsize the extent of their request from 227.2 square
feet to 26 square feet. The amended application will allow for a total of 90 square feet of
attached signage as follows: "EI Capitan" (28 sq. ft.), "Lounge" (18 sq. ft.), and" Steak &
Seafood" (44 sq.ft.l. Staff would regard this to be consistent with the standards for
approval as both the lounge and restaurant are in need of identification and the building is
located approximately 140 feet from the Gulf to Bay Boulevard right of way.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard
and Bypass Drive, and is in the CG zoning district.
Scott Shuford explained the application. The applicant worked with staff to reduce
his variance request to 26 square feet. The bonus allowed for the setback only applies to
the primary sign.
~.\V_~
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
1
!I
,.:,' ,'" :..... ::~~";" "~'.~ '.: :',' .~, I:'. I.~. :,~ : '( .......: .'. "':' l,'" .,.,.':. ,;' ...' '. ~.' . ,'"I..: "'" '. .. ~', ','I . ',:. .:.' ..',:' .t.' '. '., '.'
f.\""
.t'.:.'
.
Tom Soares stated that the road sign has been brought into compliance. He further
stated that the EI Capitan, Buccaneer, and Restaurant signs will be taken down.
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny an area variance of 227.2 square feet for the
subject property for failure to meet Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8 but
to approve an area variance of 26 square feet to allow 90 square feet of attached signage
as this meets the standards. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM B - (cont from 3-7-94) Rex M., Stephen M., & Randy R. Barbas (R.J. Automotive) for
variances of (1) 1 wall sign to permit a total of 4 wall signs; and (2) 132.4 sq ft of
attached signage to permit a total of 196.4 sq ft to perrnit nonconforming signage to
remain at 830 Court 5t, Aiken Sub, Blk 10, Lot 6, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center (East). SV
93-87
On February 7, the City Commission continued the variance request and asked staff
to work with the applicant to lessen or eliminate the variance request.
Staff has met with the applicant to work toward lessening or eliminating the area
variance request. The applicant has painted over almost half of the sign area in order to
reduce the request. Only two signs remain: "R.J. Automotive" and "Complete Auto
Care." The applicant feels these signs are necessary to identify the name and nature of
the business. Together, the two signs have an area of 1 06.35 square feet.
.,
\,
Staff feels the 42.35 square foot variance necessary to accommodate these two
signs is a minimum variance. The applicant relies entirely on these two signs for
identification of the business because there is no freestanding sign. Also, staff observes
that the building now presents a neat appearance from Court Street since the applicant
has painted out much of the signage. Staff recommends approval of the 42.35 square
foot variance on the condition that the attached signage be made to conform in the event
a freestanding sign is placed on this property.
Scott Shuford stated the request is minimal and without a freestanding sign, the
attached signage is needed to identify the business.
Connie Thomas submitted several photos indicating that some of the signs have
been painted over.
Commissioner Deegan congratulated the applicant for her cooperation with the City
in trying to resolve the issue.
Commissioner Deegan moved to deny a variance of one vvall sign to allow four wall
signs and an area variance of 1 32.4 square feet to allow 196.4 square feet for the subject
property for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8 but to
approve an area variance ot 42.35 square feet to allow 106.35 square feet as this
variance meets the standards subject to the condition that the attached signage be made
to conform in the event a freestanding sign is placed on this pro perty. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
tl
~I..
to:.;,:d;.<
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
2
l .,. ! '. J<", '.. ., l' ,...... ~,
"I >i.',',',". ., '1 ,".'
~,-t': ..'::..11,',.....: ~.~' '; . '" . ,'.. ! I.,'.' '~.,' ,.r' .~, '~_." ":.' ,:.:.." . ' '... -"..,.,'.. I,'.' II', ....1. I' . '. "
~.'''''"
F'h....;.:.f
ITEM C - (cont from 3-7-94) Cengiz Gokcen (Prime Executive Center) for variances of (1)
11 ft in height to permit a freestanding sign of 19 ft in height; (2) 22.7 sq ft in area to
permit a freestanding sign with an area of 46.7 sq ft; and (3) 1.2 ft setback from the
required 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign 3.8 ft from a right-of-way (Drew St) to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 2288 Drew St, Temple Terrace 1 st Add, Blk 0, Lots
15, 16 & 17, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 93-92
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing on-premise
freestanding sign to remain: 1) a height variance of 11 feet from the permitted 8 feet to
allow a freestanding sign 19 feet high; 2) an area variance of 22.7 square feet trom the
permitted 24 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with an area of 46.7 square feet;
and 3) a setback variance of 1 .2 feet from the required 5 feet to allow a freestanding sign
3.8 feet from the Drew Street right of way.
The applicant is requesting the existing on-premise sign be allowed to remain until
the completion of the Drew Street widening project. It is not clear from the application
why the City should postpone the requirement for compliance until after the roadway is
widened. Because no additional right of way is needed, there does not exist the prospect
of relocating the sign again at some later date to account for future right of way
acquisition.
"
C
".i...
In continuing this item at the March 7th meeting, the Commission had two
questions; when will the Drew Street widening be completed in this location, and what
height has the Commission allowed for signs in the Limited Office zone where parking is
located in front of the sign?
~
First, based upon information obtained from the Pinellas County Public Works
Department, the Drew Street widening should be completed approximately one year after
the work is begun. The work is currently projected to begin in August or September of
this year. It should be pointed out this project has already been delayed in starting, and
more delays are not out of the question.
R
;
'1
"
1
,
Regarding sign height, staff research reveals one other very similar case involving
property at 1266 Court Street (Accurate l\uto Repair), zoned Limited Office. Among the
reasons cited for the extra height was parking existed in front of the sign and the height
was necessary for the sign to be visible over any vehicles that may be in front of the sign.
A 3.9 foot height variance was approved, allowing a sign 11.9 feet high. The lowermost
panel was allowed to remain in place, it had a 7.7 foot clearance above grade.
,
...
~,
It is unlikely a vehicle over 6 feet in height will park in front of the sign.
Consequently, it would be reasonable to position the bottom of the sign panel 6 feet above
grade. The poles supporti ng the sign are 6.5 feet apart. If a sign panel is placed between
the poles, () panel measuring 3.7 feet vertically by 6.5 feet horizontally would yield a
conforming area of 24 square feet. Therefore, it is staff's position that a variance of 1.7
\
'-..
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
3
... _". ,..' ,..I "1":'" ./'.~\ 'I .". 'i' .;.' , . _ ... ~
11~:.>,.~.I~ ,",,',,' ,:......1,..;:/. ,....,...;><,...~, ".
,':~":"~".'~""""." ~:,I" ",~r~:'~:",'::t"':,~,~,,."f"'." ,,:,'. ,.,',.- :..:..,:..'. .' .'....: ,.,' .",':,.":"'I~"'.I," ".'- ~,','. "
I!' '~'.
(?'" .
feet from the permitted 8 feet to allow a 9.7 foot high sign constitutes a minimum
variance. Further, by placing the panel between the poles, it appears that the setback
requirement will be satisfied.
Scott Shuford explained the application and pointed out the variances and
justifications for granting a similar request on Court Street.
Licia Nolan stated staff's recommendation is acceptable. She pointed out that the
base of the sign is already set back 5 feet from the right-of-way.
Commissioner Deegan stated he wants to be consistent in granting variances.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to deny the original requested variances (11 foot
height variance, area variance of 22.7 square feet and setback variance of 1 .2 feet) for the
subject property for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8 but
to approve a height variance of 1.7 feet to allow a freestanding sign 9.7 feet high as this
meets the standards subject to the condition that the sign area and setback be made to
conform. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM D - (cant from 3-21-94) Valentinos Koumoulidis (Mr. Submarine) for variances of (1)
24.5 sq ft to permit 88.5 sq ft freestanding sign; and (2) 13.17 ft in height to permit a
total of 33.17 ft high freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
1010 Cleveland St, Sarah McMullen's Sub, Blk 3, part of Lot 9, zoned UC(E) (Urban
Center (East). SV 92-97
'v
t~:." On February 7, 1994 the Commission granted setback variances of 0.83 feet and 3
feet, denied a height variance of 13.17 feet and continued two area variance requests.
This application was continued on March 21 to allow the applicant the opportunity
to file a reduced height variance request for the freestanding sign. The applicant is now
requesting a variance of 6.5 feet to allow a freestanding sign 26.5 feet high. Also, based
on preliminary discussions with the applicant, it appears the applicant is willing to paint
over the nonconforming signs on the building and, therefore, it is likely will withdraw the
area variance request for attached signs. (If not withdrawn, staff recommends denial of
the request for 293.9 square feet to allow attached signs with a total area of 357.9
square feet.)
Staff recommends a 4 foot height variance. This is based upon the placement of a
sign panel that measures 5.5 feet vertically, in lieu of 8 feet, thereby yielding a conforming
area.
The applicant maintains the request for an area variance of 24.5 square feet to
allow a freestanding sign with an area of 88.5 square feet. Staff feels this, if granted, is
not in character with the signage permitted for the surrounding commercial area and would
divert attention from those land uses. Also, that granting this request would detract from
businesses that have conforming signs and would negatively affect the appearance of the
community and therefore, feels this request does not meet the standards for approval.
J
i'
.'V'"\v,
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
4
",I- '''j' II
.. .
. /\~,l.I~';::U, ::~~:t~n."~: lo . ":".":;.. ..:' .;;, d., '.' '.
ilif' ,.
r~i'~::,
The subject property is located on the north side of Cleveland Street, west of
Greenwood Avenue, and is in the Urban Center, Eastern Corridor zoning district.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and stated the applicant would withdraw the
request for an area variance.
Antoine Saydi stated he cannot remove the poles and he needs the height variance.
He agrees with staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Berfield moved to deny the two requested area variances (of 24.5
sq.ft. and 293.9 sq.ft.) for the subject property for failure to meet Section 45.24
Standards for Approval, items 1-8, to deny a height variance of 6.5 feet for failure to meet
the standards, and to approve a height variance of 4 feet to allow a freestanding sign 24
feet high as this meets the standards subject to the condition that all signs on this
property conform to the area requirements contained in the code. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM E - (cont from 3-21-94) Richard O. Davison (Bay Area Neuro Muscular) for a variance
of 6.9 sq ft in freestanding sign area to permit a 70.9 sq ft freestanding sign to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1450 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Knoll wood Replat, Blk 3, Lot
13, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-13
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to a date uncertain. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
f:(
ITEM F - (cant from 3-21-94) Arthur H. & Marv L. Bruno (Clearwater Mattress Co, Inc) for
variances of (1) 294.46 sq ft to permit a total of 354.46 sq ft of attached signage area;
and (2) one permanent window sign to permit 4 attached signs of the same type to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1659 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Gulf-to-Bay Shopping Center,
Lots 3 & 4, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-19
This item was continued from March 21 at the request of the applicant.
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing attached
signs to remain: 1) an area variance of 294.46 square feet from the permitted 60 square
feet to allow attached signs with a total area of 354.46 square feet, and 2) a variance of
one permanent window sign to allow a total of four such signs.
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard
and Keystone Avenue and is in the CC zoning district.
Scott Shuford explained the application.
John Brunson stated the applicant will withdraw the request as the signs are in
compliance.
,
\ .
~l$_..'
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
5
.' ,
. j ,~ '" " ."'
,.'< . ~;'t:~r{)~jl{~:'~:~'''f:, ,10 "":,'. ";1';:""
,,', .: "'"
, ;' . i. ," ~~,. ': 'f" :., . " ."','.' . t ..: '." ~ f, '. " . , " ,,'::', '. ' . . " " " ...' ~. " ~, .. . " '. '\ '. ',' . .
,;;';'
ITEM G - (cont from 3-21-94) HelikEl Properties (Cle8rwater Mattress Co. Inc) for variances
of (1) 15 ft to permit a freestanding sign 35 ft in height; (2) 2 above roof signs where
such signs are prohibited; (3) 12 sq ft to permit 1 20 sq ft of attached sign area on North
face of business; and (4) 150 sq ft to permit 229.5 sq ft of attached sign area on East
face of business to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 20258 US Hwv 19 N, See
18-29-16, M&B 44.01 , zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-22
This item was continued from March 21 at the request of the applicant.
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing
freestanding sign and attached above roof signs to remain: 1) a height variance of 15 feet
from the permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 35 feet in height; 2) a variance to
allow two above roof signs where above roof signs me prohibited; 3) an area variance of
12 square feet from the permitted 108 square feet of attached signage to allow a total of
120 square feet of attached signage on the north facade of the building; and 4) an area
variance of 1 50 square feet from the permitted 79.5 square feet of attached signage to
allow a total of 229.5 square feet of attached signage on the east facade of the building.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Druid Road and US 19
and is in the CH zoning district.
John Brunson stated the applicant withdraws his request and will comply with the
Code within 60 days.
d.
r
.\\>:; .
Mr. Shuford noted they are removing the tree and will put up a freestanding sign.
ITEM H - (cont from 3-21-94) Marks & Gilliss, Inc/Marks Holdinq Co, Inc (Ken Marks Ford)
for variances of (1) 37.5 sq ft in area to permit a freestanding sign of 149.5 sq ft; (2) 144
sq ft in area to permit an auxiliary sign of 200 sq ft; (3) 8 ft in height to permit an auxiliary
sign of 20 ft in height; and (4) 18ft in distance to permit an auxiliary sign with a distance
of 282 ft from the primary sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 24791 &
24825 US Hwv 19 N, Ken Marks Ford, 81 k A, Lot 1 together with Ken Marks Ford 1 st Add
Sub, Lot 1, zoned CH (Highway Commercia\). SV 93-65
Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item to April 27, 1 994. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
1. Charlie Harris Pontiac, Ine/Johnson Assoc., Inc for variances of (1) 2 freestanding signs
to permit a total of 3 freestanding signs; (2) 197.5 sq ft in area to permit total
freestanding sign area of 309.5 sq ft; (3) 17 ft in height to permit a freestanding sign of
37 ft high; and (4) 1 5 SQ ft of directional sign area per sign to permit 3 directional signs of
19 sq ft each to permit nonconforming sign age to remain at 19320 & 19246 US Hwv 19,
N, See 19-29-16, M&B 14.03 & 14.04, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 92-75
The applicant is requesting the following variances: 1) a variance of two
freestanding signs from the permitted one freestanding sign to allow a total of three
freestanding signs; 2) an area variance of 197.5 square feet from the permitted area of
\
........
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
6
O'''.J,''~i.~t;(':;i!~' ';~'.,;,:.i.;"1~~ : ::/ ....' I~.:'"
:. . . , " . ~; . ',.. i, '. '., :'" _.', ',\ :. . _ ~ I.' I" I' :, ". ",' . ' . . . J' '. . . . '" . .... " ... ,....
""'i"
". '.
.' ,
112 square feet to allow a total freestanding sign area of 309.5 square feet; 3) a height
variance of 17 feet from the perrnitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 37 feet high;
and 4) an area variance of 1 5 square feet from the permitted 4 square feet to allow three
directional signs with an area of 1 9 square feet each.
The Sunset Pontiac dealership is on leased land located on the west side of US 19,
north of Harn Boulevard, and is in the CH zoning district. It is on two side-by-side
separate ownerships. Pursuant to Commission policy regarding metes and bounds
subdivisions and the City code definition of lot, the dealership is entitled to a freestanding
sign on each ownership. All of the variances address signs on the northern property. The
northern property has three freestanding signs and three directional signs. The southern
property has one freestanding sign. The variances are requested to permit all of the
existing signs to remain.
According to tile variance application, the applicant contends that the City's sign
code is unconstitutional, unlawful, and/or improperly applied, and is proceeding with this
application to exhaust administrative remedies. Further, the applicant contends the
variances are warranted because: the site has an area 20 times the minimum required for
this zone; thore are six businesses on the property; US19 is a six lane divided highway
carrying high speed traffic; and signs with conforming height and area would be obscured
by nearby uses.
First, regarding the legality of the City's sign code, staff can not agree with the
alleg ation.
Second, regarding the area and height variances, it is staff's position that to grant
the variances would cause disparate treatment for signs in this 20ne. The Sunset Pontiac
dealership is not particularly different than other Clearwater dealerships located on US 19.
Other dealerships are also zoned CH, cover large land areas, have multiple business
operations, and front of this same six lane divided highway. Other dealerships are
governed by the same sign regulations.
To recount: freestanding sign allocations in the City are determined on the basis of
zoning and, within the CH 20ning district, one 20 foot high, 112 square foot freestanding
sign is allowed per property. Additionally, each business can be identified with signs
placed on the building. The effect is to identify the use of the property with the
freestanding sign, and to identify the businesses within the building with the signs
attached to the building.
The primary freestanding sign for Sunset Pontiac has an area of 225 square feet.
This sign area is double the area allowed for other signs in this zoning district. The height
of the sign is 37 feet. This height is 850/0 greater than allowed for other signs in this
district. Variances of this magnitude are not minimum variances.
Third, regarding the request for three freestanding signs on the northern property, it
is staff's position that this too is not a minimum variance. Two of the signs are roadside
on US 19, the third is located on the rear of the property, oriented to Ham Boulevard. The
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
"""" -
7
" '" -.. ~.
',: ,:,'. :,,!'~j~".~.;:;:;.l.-'~',.:;;: ,- '::,: '- <
,-,,: ~ . '
, ..'.' . 't' . ,.. ..;'",',' , ,f 'I,. ~'" '" f '- '. ' , '. " .: ..' . " .' .' . ':.' . i' . II , ", ' .' ~, :' ',." '~ ' ' . .
A'<. .:,:!:.
r: t. ." ,',
US 1 9 frontage for the northern property is 401 feet. This is not unusually large for
property fronting US 1 9. In order to qualify for a second freestanding sign, a property IS
required to have a minimum frontage of 500 feet. Staff finds no topographical or other
unique conditions to set this property apart from other properties in this zone. Other
properties in this zone commonly have: much larger land areas than the minirnum
allowable; multiple businesses; and commonly front US 19 which is a six lane divided
expressway. Further, it should not go unnoticed that the southern parcel has a frontage of
70 feet, and is also entitled to a freestanding sign. Together, the Pontiac dealership is
allowed two freestanding signs along its 471 foot frontage. This is an allowance that
most other developments with less than 500 feet of frontage do not enjoy.
The freestanding sign on the rear of the property is oriented to, and plainly visible
from, Harn Boulevard. Harn Boulevard is a street on which this dealership has no frontage.
The sign is located alongside a driveway that rLlns from Harn Boulevard, along the
perimeter of the Florida Power right of way, to the rear of this dealership and the
dealership adjacent to the north. The sign is approximately 430 feet from the Harn
Boulevard right of way. The placement of additional freestanding signs oriented to
roadways where there is no frontage is not a situation which the City would do well to
promote, whether through variances or otherwise.
Finally, staff is concerned with one of the three requested 1 9 square foot
directional signs. Two of the three signs, the "Body Shop" and" Parts-Service" signs, are
positioned for on-site viewing. They are set back more than 200 feet from US19 and have
limited visibility from the highway. Given the positioning of these two signs, it is staff's
~; position that the variances related thereto are minimal. However, the third sign, the
'~}i'. "Service" sign, is located roadside on US 19 and plainly viewable from the highway.
Given: the position of this sign; the degree of the request, which is more than Quadruple
the area allowed; and the collective impact of larger than allowed roadside signs, it is
staff's position that the requested area for this sign is not minimal. In the alternative, staff
recommends placement of a conforming sized directional sign to direct motorists to the
service shop.
The granting of these variances will detract from uses that have conforming signs
and will negatively affect the overall appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application. There is nothing unique about this property
and it is not being treated any differently from others with the same zoning classification.
Gordon Schiff, attorney representing Sunset Pontiac GMC Truck South, Inc., who is
the applicant stated they have a vested right under common law to use the property,
including the signs; that the ordinance is unconstitutional based on Oi mmitt vs. City of
Clearwater, therefore an ordinance does not exist and there is no authority to consider
,
\
'~-"
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
8
'..~ '.,,:. ,..~.'l.... " . ,'~,"'."".', '.~'",,1"'~"".I. ',' '..' ., ,
':';':":;:\'t~'~':..
.'.':("'0':.;',";' '.. .'; '.'
.',' 4 '.', '",..',,' '~I,.". :.:, '..,," ", ,......, ..' ,." '...'i' ",'.,". ~,~ '~' '~" . ",' ,...\..,. ',' . t, ,"':' .,.
.is''
.;'-I!' .
variances; or the City, pursuant to amendments to the ordinance is utilizing a retroactive
amortization schedule but there has been no analysis or basis to have a retroactive
amortization schedule. Therefore, they feel there is no ordinance or if the City takes the
position there is, the amortization is not proper; and until the Patrick Media case, which is
challenging the Ordinance from the stand point of not complying with the proper
procedures under the United States Constitution, is decided, further action should be held
in abeyance. Assuming the ordi nance is in place, it is arbitrary. There is no analysis to
support the recommendations. The numbers are arbitrary and, therefore, unconstitutional
and result in treating dissimilar properties the same. Application of the ordinance
demonstrates discriminatory action. Page 6 of the Agenda Memo shows arbitrary and
discriminatory action. There is no basis for the City saying what is the minimum
necessary. The applicant has a leasehold interest in the property and there is no basis to
apply the amortization because the signs are leased. The City has not taken into account
the cost to remove signs. These are two separate and distinct properties and each should
be looked at separately. It is not fair to use one to limit the signs on the other. They must
be looked at separately.
Mr. Schiff noted there are three reasons for keeping all three signs on the northern
property. The first reason is the intent of the ordinance is not to challenge having three
internal signs. Secondly, the directional signs are there to address the safety of their
customers by directing internal circulation. They are the minimum necessary to achieve
safety. The applicant will remove the sign on Harn Boulevard if variances are granted for
the two remaining freestanding signs on the northern property. They feel that two of the
freestanding signs are primary and necessary, one being 17.5 feet above the 20 feet
allowed by Code with an area of 107.25 square feet and the other being 40 feet high and
187 -1/4 square feet in area.
As for the second property, Mr. Schiff stated they are requesting an 8 foot height
variance for a sign that is only half the size of the maximum square footage allowed. It
does not make sense to make someone remove or lower a sign that can be replaced by a
larger sign. There is a lot of traffic on US 19 and a car dealership is the type of business
that is only an occasional destination as opposed to a business visited on a regular basis.
There are six businesses operating on the same parcel (new truck sales, new car sales,
used car sales, a parts business, a service business, and a body shop) as well as two
franchises.
In response to a questiun froln the Mayor regarding previous variance requests and
their outcome, Mr. Shuford stated the burden of proof is on the applicant and he felt that
there were circumstances in each case that warranted the variances that were granted.
Discussion ensued about the significance of identification and whether or not a
larger sign is better than two signs. Mr. Schiff noted that if a height variance is denied for
a sign that is smaller than what is permitted, you encourage the applicant to replace it
with a larger sign.
(..,
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
9
; ....~.. ,?ot. .'~"..,' ~
'-;'~'l'" :';, ~ :." ' . _;: .", ;'" ._
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue the request to the meeting of May 16,
1 994. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
~p
.~...-
"'
Commissioner Deegan asked for clarification of the height of the sign on the
southern parcel stating that it is indicated that the sign is 15.4 feet and that no variance is
being requested for the height. Mr. Schiff responded that they hired a company to do a
survey and their heights were not accurate with respect to that sign and he went with
measurements as determined by City staff.
Mr. Shuford stated he would not be able to say how high the sign on the southern
property because his information states 15 feet 5 inches tall and Mr. Schiff has stated it is
40 feet tall.
Mr. Schiff stated this is related to the southernmost sign and the City's
measurements are that the sign is 28 feet high and they are asking for an 8 ft variance to
the height.
Mr. Shuford recommended this matter be continued to allow the applicant and staff
to check the height and get the correct inform ation in an amended application since this
item was not included. Continuance would also provide the applicant with an opportunity
to show that 19 square feet is needed for safety as opposed to the 4 square feet which
the Code allows.
The Mayor noted that the Legal Department needs to interject regarding the issues
that were raised by the applicant's attorney.
Mr. Shuford noted that there would be a need to readvertise this item and
f.." suggested it be continued to the meeting of May 16, 1994.
~t'."
Commissioner Thomas requested that a copy of the minutes of this hearing be
attached to the agenda item for May 1 6.
Commission direction states that public hearings at regular meetings will be held on
Thursday meeting dates. Therefore, this item will be scheduled for the meeting of May
1 9, 1994.
2. Sam C. & Judv Y. Liu (Pekinq Palace) for variances of(1) 5 ft to permit a freestanding
sign 0 ft from property line; and (2) 3.5 sq ft each to permit 3 directional signs of 7.5 sq ft
each to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1608 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd, Lakewood
Replat, part of Lots 1, 4 & 6 together with all of Lot 5. zoned CG (General Commercial).
SV 93-17
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing
freestanding sign to remain, with a smaller area and lower height, and to allow the three
existing directional signs to remain: 1) a setback variance of 5 feet from the required 5
(
"';0'
minSP04a.94
4-/1 9/94
10
. :;;';~~"~'~~\_<l'~;""(;i';".::.':." ,~,:,/,,;":,\ '. p~ .:,':"'d!<,"
Staff feels the appl ieant' s requests meet the standards for variance approval.
~"'-'
J..:......
. '.~ :';.' . ",
foot setback to allow a freestanding sign zero feet from the Gulf to Bay Boulevard right of
way, and 2) an area variance of 3.5 square feet from the permitted 4 square feet to allow
three directional signs with an area of 7.5 square feet each.
The setback property is located on the north side of Gul f to Bay Boulevard, east of
Lake Avenue, and is in the CG zoning district.
The applicant proposes to alter the freestanding sign to make the size and height
conform. However, a variance is requested to allo w the sign to remain with a zero foot
setback from the Gulf to Bay Boulevard right of way. The restaurant building is located
approximately 8 feet from the Gulf to Bay Boulevard right of way, causing the sign to be
"squeezed" into a very small front yard. In fact, the sign occupies all of this 8 foot wide
space. It extends from the right of way to the building, touching the roof. It is virtually
impossible in a space this small to place a freestanding sign in compliance with the
setback requirement. As such, the applicant will face an unnecessary hardship in the
event the setback requirement is strictly enforced.
~. .'
The parking lot that serves the restaurant is located to the rear of the business. It
can be accessed from Gulf to Bay Boulevard, Lake Avenue, or Yelvington Avenue. Each of
the access drives is marked with a 7.5 square foot directional sign. The signs on Lake and
Yelvington serve to identify that the parking lot is for the use of restaurant patrons.
Without these signs, there may result some confusion, because the restaurant is not
located adjacent to these driveway entrances. The restaurant is actually located mid-block
between Lake and Yelvington. The other driveway entrance, the one on Gulf to Bay
Boulevard, is difficult for Gulf to Bay motorists to locate. The drive is narrow, and it has
little visibility due to the placement of buildings on the edges of the drive and near the Gulf
to Bay right of way. The third directional sign serves to identify this obscure drive. All
three directional signs are tastefully designed wooden signs. There would be little benefit
to the public to require these signs be replaced now. However, it is staff's position that,
at such time as the business owner may choose to replace the signs, they be replaced
with conforming signs.
f
The existence of a freestanding sign with a zero foot setback from Gulf to Bay
Boulevard and three directional signs, each with an area of 7.5 square feet, will not detract
from the surrounding businesses that have conforming signs and will not adversely affect
the appearance of the community.
Mr. Shuford expl ained the appli cation stating that meeting the setback presents a
hardship. Staff recommends approval subject to two conditions, however, they do not
feel the height variance is needed.
Phu Tang stated he will comply with the code as to height and the sign will be 8
feet by 8 feet. He agrees with staff's recommendation.
.;
i'
~
%""
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
l
1 1
" ., ., J,&.it....$...' '~.~.,"/>: '1'1:-:.i~I'I~'~,.i':t '.. d
:\1
.':' ....." I:..' ":',': "I' ':. .' ':.,' ,.....,: ,/:' 'J ~', : ....'.. . ;..,. '.~ ",.:. :" '...'. ~'~'I :.~: t.1:- I ';.
4;'ii'"
~~.r':I~";"
Mr. Shuford pointed out that the square footage permitted is 64 square feet not
150 square feet as indicated on the second page of the agenda memo.
Commissioner Thomas inquired as to whether the sign is measured on the outside
or by the border and Mr. Shuford responded it is measured on the outside. Mr. Shuford
stated the "Open" sign is considered an attached directional sign and is treated similar to a
"No Vacancy" sign.
The Mayor noted that the reader board is part of the sign.
It was noted that the "Open" sign is the proper size for a directional sign and it
constitutes the fourth such sign and can be permitted.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a setback variance of 5 feet to allow a
freestanding sign zero feet from the Gulf to Bay Boulevard right of way and an area
variance of 3.5 square feet to allow three directional signs with an area of 7.5 square feet
each for the subject propertY' for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for App roval, items 1-
8, subject to the following conditions: ') at such time as the directional signs are
replaced, they shall be made to conform to code, and 2) by reconstructing a sign within
the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no
governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the
event the property is acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public
purpose. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
~.
{;."
3. Aubrev Maclean, TRE/Clearwater Trust/Trizec Pro perties, Inc (Gavfersl for variances of
(1) 192 sq ft of sign area to permit a total of 342 sq ft of attached signage on east side of
building; and (2) 192 sq ft of sign area to permit 342 sq ft of attached area on west side
of building; and (3) a ratio vari ance of .027 sq ft of attached sign a rea per 1.0 linear foot
of building width to perrnit a ratio of 1 .527 sq ft per linear foot of building width to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 20505 US Hwv 19, Sec 17-29-' 6, M&B 32.01 &
32.02, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-30
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing attached
signs on the east and west building faces to remain: 1) an area variance of 384 square
feet from the permitted 300 square feet to allow a total of 684 square feet of attached
signage on the east and west building faces, and 2) a ratio variance of 0.027 square feet
of attached sign area per 1 .0 linear foot of building width from the permitted ratio of 1.5
square feet per 1 .0 linear foot of building width to allow a ratio of 1.527 square feet per
linear foot of building width.
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard
and US 19, and is in the CC zoning distri ct.
According to the application, the variances are requested because the signs are in
scale with the building and do not pose a safety hazard given their distance from the
roadway. Furthermore, the application indicates that repair to the brick wall is virtually
impossible due to the age of the brick and mortar.
(
......-
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
1 2
~':,~."i;itC~i>'t,,~'of'" iti:./f~': .'.'
. '. '. .', ' , " . , ' , ' . ',': ", I ~, . ,,' . .' ..' ...' . '. - .' ,,' .. . " . '.. ,'. ," . . i
f!:,:;.I"q. .
~~ '01:;,
.)
Both of the signs addressed in the application are directed to the interior of the
Clearwater Mall parking lot. The maxi mum allowable size of 1 50 square feet will both
respect the scale of the building and adequately serve to identify Gayfers to mall patrons
who are in the parking lot. The application does not indicate the cost to repair the brick
wall, however, staff notes that other buildings throughout the City have undergone
cosmetic repair to facilitate replacement of nonconforming signs. It is not clear why this
store should warrant different treatment in this regard. Finally, the area requested is more
than double the area allowed by code, thereby causing this request to fail to qualify as a
minimum variance.
The existence of these two 342 square foot signs is not in character with the signs
permitted for other major tenants in shopping malls. The granting of these variances will
detract from businesses that have conforming signs.
Staff feels (he applicant's requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and stated Gayfers had requested a variance
for the north face identification sign in 1991 with the condition that all other signs II'..HI be
brought into conformance. They are requesting variances to allow other attached signs to
remain as they are now. The Code has changed since then and the sign facing Gulf-to-Bay
is in conformance. They are allowed 150 square feet above each entrance but each sign
presently measures 342 square feet. The applicant has expressed concern regarding the
repair of the brick after the signs are removed.
A
i '
't~:i~, '.."
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present.
Com missioner Deegan inquired as to whether there were any examples of removal
of signs that had defaced a building as a result. Mr. Shuford indicated there were some
instances of fading bricks.
Com missioner Deegan expressed concern regarding removal of signage where a
building is defaced and cannot be repaired. He noted that is different then asking for a
variance for financial gain.
Commissioner Fitzgerald read the motion made on December 1 9, 1991 wherein a
variance of 214 square feet was approved for the north facing sign to permit its
continuation after October 1 3, 1992 subject to the variance applying only to this sign and
all other signs being brought into conformance by October 13, 1992.
Discussion ensued noting that the Code now allows more signage on the east and
west sides than was allowed in 1991.
Mr. Shuford stated their 1991 vari ance is no longer needed as that sign now
conforms under the Code changes.
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
,
'-...
1 3
. 'f"" ,:, . ),. ~~'.i...! 11,\.\';., \::;~;~. ;';$ i',......., t' '! ":J~,~I' ...!~, ;.',..... "...." ,
~, .' . :' ,':, .' : ~ I '.' ..,..... ..... . .' _ ," " .,', ".' " :, . . " . , .'. : : \' . II .
f'!!J.):;
Discussion ensued as to whether the applicant and their representative had been
notified of the hearing and it was stated they had.
Commissioner Deegan moved that this item be continued to April 27, 1 994 to allow
staff to determine if there are similar buildings and whether signage can be easily removed
and building damage repaired. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
4. Aubrev Maclean, TRE/Clearwater Trust/Trizec Properties, Inc (Dillard's) for variances of
(1) 21 .26 sq ft of attached signage to permit a total of 1 71 .26 sq ft of attached sign age
on the south elevation; and (2) 21.26 sq ft of attached signage to permit a total of 171 .26
sq ft of attached signage on the east elevation to permit nonconforming signage to remain
at 20505 US Hwv 19, See 17-29-16, M&B 32.01 & 32.02, zoned CC (Commercial
Center). SV 93-39
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow the existing signs to
remain: 1) an area variance of 21.26 square feet of attached sign area from the permitted
150 square feet to allow 171.26 square feet of attached sign area on the southeast
building face, and 2) an area variance of 21.26 square feet from the permitted 150 square
feet to allow 171.26 square feet of attached sign area on the southwest building face.
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of US1 9 and Gulf to Bay
Boulevard, and is in the CC zoning district.
Dillard's in Clearwater Mall is currently identified with three attached signs. One
,t'". sign, which conforms, is located at the main entrance on the westerly side of the Mall.
%1\.: The other signs, which do not conform, are located on the southeast and southwest faces
of the store. Each of these two signs measures 1 71 .26 square feet, or 21.26 square feet
larger than is permitted by code.
The applicant contends these signs are in keeping with the role of anchor tenants in
. regional malls, are in proportion to the scale of the Dillard's building, and do not serve to
secure a greater financial return from the property since the signs are located away from
public streets. Staff agrees. Further, since the existing signs are only modestly oversized
and are located to the rear of the Mall, staff regards these variance requests to be minimal.
The existence of these two 171.26 square foot signs is in character with the
signage permitted for the surrounding commercial uses. The granting of these variances
will not detract from the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests meet the standards for variance approval.
Scott Shuford explained the application. This is an anchor tenant located at the
rear of the mall. All their signs are away from the streets. In response to a question he
stated Dillard's went into the mall after 1990 and was able to replace the face of the
existing signs of the previous tenant.
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present.
,"
~h"
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
14
~.,,~,.,.~"iii/~"'\h'I'~'~f. -;'j<v.:; t1A~-\'f""'oi:...j";:"h"""".;I,....~..'; ",,"_::'
,'. ' ,." " ..' . ' " ., " , .,' , ' , , '. ',i" , . " j '. .', . I I .. 'q . , .
r~', Commissioner Berfield stated they are arguing for signs on the east and the west
~: similar to Gayfers.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve an area variance of 21.26 square feet
to allow 171.26 square feet of attached sign area on the southeast building face and an
area variance of 21.26 square feet to allow 171.26 square feet of attached sign area on
the southwest building face for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards
for Approval, items 1-8. The motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken;
Mayor Garvey and Commissioners Fitzgerald, Deegan, and Thomas voted "Aye,"
Commissioner Berfield voted "Nay. II Mo1ion carried.
6. David E. Edmunds (Spencer's Western World II) for variances (1) to permit a 3-
dimensional object (horse) used as a sign; and (2) of 9.7 ft in height to permit a
freestanding sign 29.7 ft in height to perm it nonconforming signage to remain at 1884
Drew St, New Marymont, Blk B, Lots 2, 3, & 4 together with west % of vacated street to
east, zoned CG (General Commercial). S'\I 93-86
The applicant is requesting the folio wing variance to permit the existing .
freestanding sign to remain, most notably with the three dimensional horse located at the
top: 1) a variance to alia w a three dimensional object used as a sign, and 2) a height
vari ance of 9.7 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign 29.7 feet high.
The subject property is located 011 the north side of Drew Street, east of Corona
Avenue, and is in the CG zoning district.
(.
(h.. These variances are requested to allow the three dimensional horse to remain on
Spencer's Western World II sign. The horse is located at the top of the sign and reaches a
height of 29.7 feet above grade. Below the horse is a sign panel that is one-half the size
allo wed by code. This is a unique conditio n affecting a unique sign. Given that the area
of the sign panel is substantially less tha n the code alia ws, and recognizing there exists
some sentiment towards the horse, it does not appear to be in the public interest to
strictly enforce the code in this case.
This 29.7 foot high three dimensional sign will not detract from the businesses that
have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the overall appearance of the
community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests meet the standards for variance approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and noted that the variances are to permit a
three dimensional horse to remain. The applicant has stated the horse is a landmark and
an heirloom. He stated that previously there had been a large pencil on Drew Street which
was going to be treated as a work of art if the lettering on it were painted over but the
owner opted to remove the pencil. Mr. Shuford noted that some three dimensional signs
might have historical significance and should be grandfathered in.
~.
~-,:
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
15
..;: <':g#~~~'~'~':'~:'-'; \}.I~,lt~~!E<;,j\,(...H 'i ...~.;..t.~'''I.:.>.:'." ,\.: ,
e
,.
f(1.'.
Jim Bauman, attorney representing the applicant, stated the horse is a family
heirloom. The business has been in this location for nine years. Twelve letters in support
were noted in addition to a petition with 160 signatures. The sign that is attached to the
horse is half of what is permitted. The horse is well known as an identifier for this
business and is compatible with the surrounding area.
Discussion ensued regarding other three dimensional signs such as the golden
arches.
Mr. Shuford stated that if the horse is blown down, staff recommends that it not be
put back up.
Discussion ensued as to whether the condition meant if it goes down involuntarily
or is intentionally re moved. Mr. Bauman stated that if the horse can be put back up in
such a case, the appli cant wishes to do so.
Mr. Shuford recommended they add the words "by the property owner or
irreparably damaged" into condition 1 of the motion.
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a variance to allow a three dimensional
object (horse) to be used as a sign and a height variance of 9.7 feet for the subje ct
property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1 -8, subject to the
following conditions: 1) at such time as the three dimensional object is removed by the
property owner or irreparably damaged, it shall not be replaced and the sign height shall
~'1!" not exceed the zone limit, and 2) the area of the sign panel shall not be made larger than
';"" ' the existing 32 square feet. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
6. James C. & Carolvn C. Johnson (Mac's Sports) for variances of (1) 187.3 sq ft to
permit 251.3 sq ft of attached signage; and (2) 1 sign type to permit 6 attached signs to
permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2.126 Drew St, Mosell Acres, part of Lot 2,
zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-93
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing attached
signs to remain: 1) an area variance of 187.3 square feet from the permitted 64 square
feet to allo w 251.3 square feet of attached sig ns, and 2) a variance of one sign fro m the
maximum of five signs to allow six attached signs.
The subject property is located on the north side of Drew Street, east of NE
Coachman Road, and is in the CG zoning district. It should be noted that, based upon the
sign areas indicated on drawings submitted in conjunction with the application, the actual
variance needed to acco mmodate the existing attached sig n is less than the 1 87.3 square
feet requested. Rather, a 127.8 square foot variance will accommodate the signs.
There are six attached signs on this business as follows: two "Discover Diving"
signs at 42.25 square feet each, one "Scuba Lessons" sign at 3 square feet, and three
sports figures cumulatively totalling 104.3 square feet. The sports figures are wooden
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
\~
"1.\",
16
. , ..
, ".'ii:~;~~'::i{i\ I"'i', \.::./~; ""'~':' ~/k'K;" .~.j;~".v.lr ~,'l'f~ \
. .: .',' . ',' , \.,..... . ' ',.' . " I' ~ " .' ~ " . ' I ..." #. ..' '.. :, . ~ ; '. '. . ,
!fJ'h
r~ ~-to,..~.
silhouettes attached to the front wall of the business. One of the figures has either fallen
or been removed fro m the wall. Yet, due to discoloration of the wall beneath where the
sign was located, the silhouette remains.
The applicant states that the aging process of the building has caused the wooden
walls to discolor underneath the signs and, if the wood is painted to obscure the
silhouettes, this natural wood building will not look good.
A 127.8 square foot variance is triple the attached sign area permitted by code.
This is not a rninimum variance. To grant a variance of this magnitude would cause a
special privilege for this business owner that is not available to other business owners
throughout the City. Finally, regarding the appearance of the wooden walls, given the
wide range of different finishes that are available for exterior wood, it does not seem
unreasonable to believe that with some thoughtful consideration an attractive finish for
this sporting goods store could be found.
The existence of attached signs having an area of 191.8 square feet is not in
character with the signage permitted for the surrounding commercial areas and diverts
attention from those land uses. The granting of these variances will detract from
businesses that have conforming signs and will negatively affect the appearance of the
community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
II..
~~~.~
Mr. Shuford explained the application.
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present.
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the requested variances for the subject
property for failure to meet Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
7. Pinellas County for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 3.3 ft in height and 7 sq
ft in area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 631 Chestnut St, Magnolia Park,
Blk 1 9, Lot 1, part of Lots 2, 9 & 10, zoned UC(CI (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-98
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a freestanding sign 3.3 feet in height
and 7 square feet in area to permit replacement of the freestanding sign with a smaller,
lower sign.
The subject property is located on the south side of Chestnut Street, west of East
Avenue, and is in the UC(C) zoning district.
This property is located in the downtown core. Ordinarily, attached signs are used
to identify downtown businesses. Further, freestanding signs are not permitted in this
zone. This is because properties in this district are typically developed with no setback
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
f
~~.,.
17
,l.., !f.' . ~
I
I
I
j
A? '~'r'
f~' J.~,
from downtown sidewalks. The property which is the subject of this variance request,
however, is not like most other properties in this district. The building is positioned
approximately 17 feet from the Chestnut Street right of way.
The proposed freestanding sign is modestly sized. It is 3.3 feet high and 7 square
feet in area.
Staff finds this property to be unique given the setback of the building, and the
variance request to be minimal given the modest dimensions of this sign.
A 3.3 foot hig h, 7 square foot sign is in character with the signage permitted for
the surrounding commercial areas and does not divert attention from those land uses. The
granting of this variance will not detract from surrounding businesses and properties that
have conforming signs and will not negatively affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets the standards for variance approval
Mr. Shuford explained that this is similar to a previous request and it is a request to
replace an existing freestanding sign with a sm aller one.
Camille Bozard, representing Pinellas County, was present but made no comment.
{
Ii,:..
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a variance to allow a freestanding sign
3.3 feet in height and 7 square feet in area for the subject property for meeting Section
45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
8. Laura N. Connollv, TRE & G. Nail (Gulf-to-Bav Motel & Casa Ole' Restaurantl for
variances of (1) 1 freestanding sign to permit 2 such signs; and (2) 64 square ft to permit
a total of 1 28 sq ft of freestanding sign area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
2950 & 2960 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd., Sec 1 7-29-16, M&B 14.052 & 14.053, zoned CG (General
Commercial). SV 93-104
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the motel sign to
remain, but with a reduced area and height (the applicant proposes to modify the sign to
make the area 64 square feet and the height 16 feet): 1) a variance of one freestanding
sign from the permitted one freestanding sign to allow two freestanding signs, and 2) an
area variance of 64 square feet from the permitted 64 square feet to allow freestanding
signs with a total area of 1 28 square feet.
The subject property is located on the north side of Gulf to Bay Boulevard, west of
Bayview Avenue, and is in the CG zoning district. There are presently two freestanding
signs on this property. The westernmost sign, identifying the restaurant and recreational
vehicle park, conforms with the area and height requirements of the code. The
easternmost sign, identifying the motel does not.
,
l
'~.'
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
18
";j, ,~~..-:"~.;.. ,.~,.:/~!",,~... .:... ".'
This property is developed with two buildings, with a separate business in each. In
'~"'I'" the west building is the Casa Ole Restaurant, in the east building is the Gulf to Bay Motel.
Each business has an existing freestanding sign along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. Also, each
business is provided with its own parking and landscaping. To the casual observer, it
would appear each business is located on a separate property.
The property is unique because these businesses function as two separate entities
with separate buildings and parking. It would pose an extreme hardship for either business
to lose its identification sign on Gulf to Bay Boulevard.
Two 16 foot high, 64 square foot signs, setback 5 feet from the Gulf to Bay
Boulevard right of way, are in character with other signs permitted for Gulf to Bay
Boulevard uses. The granting of these variances will not detract from businesses that
have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests meet the standards for variance approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application. He pointed out that the applicant is
proposing to bring the sign into conformance. The property is developed with two
businesses which function independently. The property is less than 500 feet wide.
The Mayor clarified that the request is to allow two freestanding signs with a total
of 128 square feet of area and not to allow 128 square feet on one sign.
ic:,;..
Patricia Muscarella, attorney representing the applicant stated they agree to bring
the other Gulf to Bay Motel sign down to 64 square feet. The other sign is for the travel
trailer park in the rear and restaurant which was a lot larger but when it blew down, it was
brought into conformance. This is the minimum variance required.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a variance of one freestanding sign to
allow two such signs and an area variance of 64 square feet from the permitted 64 square
feet to allow 2 freestanding signs with a total area of 128 square feet, for the subject
property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to the
condition that neither sign shall have an area exceeding 64 square feet or a height
exceeding 20 feet. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
9. Dan DouQlas Enterprises, Inc (Fred Astaire Dance Studio) for a variance of 22.8 sq ft of
attached signage to permit a total of 7 O. 8 sq ft to remain (Jones 5t) to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 225 Ft Harrison Ave, N, Jones Sub of Nicholson's,
Blk 5, Lots 8, 9 & 10, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-113
The applicant is requesting the following variance to permit the painting on the
north wall of the building to remain: an area variance of 22.8 square feet from the
permitted 48 square feet to allow 70.8 square feet of attached signage.
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of N. Ft. Harrison Avenue
and Jones Street, and is in the UC(C) zoning district.
.'
~.
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
19
~ t't:l, tl } I." 'Ii t," J,,\l'f ~."':j.'i..( ,>l .f' ",' .
.' ':. '.' ..',,'.., ;"': ; .:::, ':.'.'" " . .',: .....:':.' .}.....' , -: ,'" '. '" ." ~." '"
Businesses in the do wntown core are allocated signs for each street upon which
f!;,;:r\ the business fronts. The Fred Astaire Dance Studio fronts two streets; N. Ft. Harrison
Avenue and Jones Street. Consequently, the business is allowed signs oriented to each
street. The sign located on the south wall of the building, oriented to N. Ft. Harrison
Avenue, is 42 square feet and conforms to code. The sign located on the north wall of
the building, oriented to Jones Street, is 70.8 square feet and does not conform to the
area specification.
The nonconforming sign has no lettering, it is strictly pictorial. It depicts two
dancers. It is artwork and it is a sign. Whether this artwork/sign enhances the downtown
ambience, or detracts from it, is strictly in the eye of the beholder. Nevertheless, the sign
is existing and it is not substantially larger than the code allows. It is staff's position the
sign is unique and the variance is minimal. However, if the sign changes in any manner,
staff recommends the sig n be made to conform to code.
The granting of this variance will not detract from surrounding businesses that have
conforming signs and will not negativeiy impact the overall appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets the standards for variance approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application. The request is to allow painting to remain.
The business fronts on two streets and is allowed a 48 square foot sign for each street.
The painting could be considered art if it was not advertising dancing. The painting is
unique and the variance minimal.
C
"h"
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present.
Discussion ensued regarding uniqueness of the property as a condition for granting
a variance and whether uniqueness of the sign should be considered. Mr. Shuford stated
that the sign and the building combine to set a unique condition. In response to a
statement made by Commissioner Deegan regarding setting a precedent because the sign
is unique, Mr. Shuford stated a Code amendment will do away with that condition for
granting a variance. The matter came before the Development Code Adjustment Board but
they postpo ned consideration until a full Board is present.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve an area variance of 22.8 square feet,
for the subject property, for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8,
subject to the condition that if the sign changes in any manner, the sign shall be made to
conform to code. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
10. Directions for Mental Healtb for a variance of 3.7 ft in height to permit an 11.7 ft high
freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1437 Belch~r Rd, S, Sec
19-29-16, Pinellas Groves, part of Lot 8, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-01
The applicant is requesting the following variance to permit the existing
freestanding sign to remain: a height variance of 3.7 feet from the permitted 8 feet to
allow a freestanding sign 11.7 feet high.
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
(
~".
20
'"" . ".~
." ..... ," ~. \!hJ!I~;;.'.'~'."":J.~..'i"
. " , " { '. ' . \.: :;,.,'". ;. , ~ ' . .!, .".. . . ,,' ...!,'. . '" .' , " '..' , I ' . .'.' ,,' . !, .' .' I., , " . .'
\.
~~\
~
The subject property is located on the east side of Belcher Road, north of Nursery
Road, and is in the OL zoning district.
This sign presently has good visibility from S. Belcher Road. It is a monument-type
sign and, as such, it would be more difficult to lower the height of than a pole sign. This
sign is located in an island of the parking lot. There are parking spaces located both to the
north and south of the sign. If the sign is lowered to meet the 8 foot height requirement,
the sign may be partially obscured when the adjoining parking spaces are occupied,
depending upon the height of the vehicle occupying the space. If lowered, the bottom of
the sign panel would be 4.1 feet above grade. Also, it is worth noting the sign includes
the address number of the property. The address number is presently located
approximately 6.5 feet above grade. If the sign is lowered, and the address number
continues to be included on the sign in the same location rei ative to the sign panel, the
number would be 2.6 feet above grade. The sign and number could be lowered
approximately a foot and continue to be plainly visible, but the cost to the applicant to
perform this action would weigh great in comparison to the marginal benefit that would be
derived by the public.
The existence of this 11.7 foot high sign is in character with the signage permitted
for nearby nonresidential uses. The sign will not divert attention from those land uses.
The granting of this variance will not detract from businesses that have conforming signs
and will not negatively affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets the standards for variance approval.
(;!,: Mr. Shuford explained the application in detail pointing out that it is a monument
type sign making it more difficult to lower the height. The sign does include the street
number and if it is lowered the number and part of the message will be obstructed from
view.
Toby Perry, Director of Planning for Directions for Mental Health I stated this is a
non-profit community mental health organization and changing the sign will cost money
they don't have.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a height variance of 3.7 feet for the
subject property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Susan Radner, representing CIGNA, pointed out that when there was a different
tenant there they had a sign on top. The Mayor responded that no sign can be placed on
top of this sign.
The Mayor questioned whether they should establish a standard condition that if a
sign which has been granted variances is ever modified it should meet Code.
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
r'
'\'--
21
~
, .', I , . ~ . .: ; .' . .' __ :',. " . . .' ': ," , . .:... ' . ~. . f ':: '. . . t . . r'" ~' , . '. ( . .
..~
~,..
~ ' '
l
Mr. Shuford responded that the face of a sign can be changed but if the sign is
changed in any other way, it must conform to the Code. If a variance is granted and the
sign is blown down, staff will allo w the sign to be erected as it was. He noted that
variances run with the land.
The meeting recessed from 11 :00 a.m. to 11:10 a.m.
11. Cynthia C. Jacobson (HCA Familv Care Center) for variances of (1 ) 46 sq ft to permit
a freestanding sign area of 70 sq ft; (2) 10ft to permit an 18 ft high sign; and (3) 2.4 ft in
distance to permit a freestanding sign to remain 2.6 ft from a street right-of-way (Belcher
Rd) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2 Belcher Rd, N, See 13-29-'15, M&B
11.18, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-02
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing
freestanding sign to remain for an extended time: 1) an area variance of 46 square feet
from the permitted 24 square feet to allow a freestanding sign area of 70 square feet; 2) a
height variance of 10 feet from the permitted 8 feet to allow a freestanding sign 18 feet
high; and 3) a setback variance of 2.4 feet from the required 5 feet to allow a freestanding
sign 2.6 feet from the Belcher Road right of way.
The subject property is located on the north west corner of N. Belcher Road and
Cleveland Street, and is in the OL zoning district.
if
'~i{:~,.
According to the application, the existing business will undergo a future merger,
thereby causing the sign to be changed twice.
The existing sign is substantially nonconforming. The 70 square foot area is almost
triple the area permitted by code. The 1 8 foot height is more than double the height
permitted by code. These are not minimum variances.
Given the extent of the variances, staff recommends the sign be made to conform
to the area and height standards in a timely manner. Further, recognizing the likelihood
that the message on the sign will change in two years, it would be prudent to place a sign
designed in a manner that will facilitate a future face change.
The existence of this 18 foot high, 70 square foot sign is not in character with
signs permitted for the surrounding properties. The granting of these variances will detract
from properties that have conforming signs.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and stated the applicant wishes to keep the
sign as it is for two years as they will merge with another company and bring the sign into
compliance at that time. Staff does not consider the request to be minimal and feels the
applicant should come into compliance now, taking the merger into account when they
design the sign.
( .
'~,"',
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
22
. . .
" .,.;.t~. ~~~!.,. ~'.'~\..l\' . '.'~'.'\~'f .. ,~." ""fk/ f~pi'l-:I.'>::'.~' ',>,
r."'~.
\ ~. . '?;;.
,
"
Bob Wooldridge stated their request was to keep the present sign for two months
not two years. After the merger there will be a new logo and he stated it will take 90 to
120 days to find out what the new logo will be. He feels they should be able to meet the
setback.
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the requested variances for the subject
property and give the applicant 90 days to come into conformance. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
12. Carl Tillv, Inc (Drew Shoppinq Center) for a variance of 5 ft to permit a freestanding
sign 0 ft from N Arcturas Ave and Drew St rights-of-way to permit nonconforming signage
to remain at 1891-1899 Drew St, Skycrest Unit #6, Blk E, Lots 1 & 2, zoned CG (General
Commercia!). SV 94-03
The applicant is requesting a setback variance of 5 feet to allow the existing
freestanding sign to remain zero feet from the Drew Street and N. Arcturas Avenue rights
of way.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Drew Street and N.
Arcturas Avenue, and is in the CG zoning district.
.r
~.
":1:
This sign conforms to the size and height requirements of the code, but is not
positioned back from either the Drew Street or N. Arcturas Avenue right of way. If the
sign is moved southward to meet the 5 foot setback requirement from Drew Street, the
sign will obstruct the driveway access from N. Arcturas Avenue. If the sign is moved
westward to meet the 5 foot requirbment from N, Arcturas Avenue, the sign will be
located in an existing vehicular circulation aisle for the parking lot. An unnecessary
hardship will be imposed upon the applicant if the code is strictly enforced under these
conditions.
The existence of this sign zero feet from the Drew Street and N. Arcturas Avenue
rights of way will not divert attention from nearby land uses or signs. The granting of this
variance will not adversely affect businesses that have conforming signs.
Mr. Shuford expl ained the application stating staff felt the setback variance is
justified.
Neither the applicant nor their representative were present.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a setback variance of 5 feet for the
subject property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to
the condition that by maintaining a sign within the street setback pursuant to this
variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the
cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent
domain for road widening or any other public purpose. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
~~" '
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
23
, . <'J': ...... ". " " '.:,'. '. '.. '..:,'.:" '.... .: '....' . "..:-".' . . ...' .,:. '," .....
'\
iIS'J. .-':!{"" 1 3. WL T Software of Florida, Inc for a variance of 4.9 ft in height to permit a 12.9 ft high
,~ freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 831 Hercules Ave, N, Sec
1 2-29-1 5, Pinellas Groves SE }4, part of Lot 8, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 94-04
The applicant is requesting the following variance to permit the existing
freestanding sign to remain: a height variance of 4.9 feet from the permitted 8 feet to
allow a freestanding sign 12.9 feet high,
The subject property is located on the east side of Hercules Avenue, south of
Palmetto Street, and is in the 0 L zoning district.
This sign is 12.9 feet high. There is 9.4 feet from grade to the bottom of the sign
panel. Also, the address number is affixed to the sign post. The number is visible, though
marginally so, and is clearly secondary to the sign. The digits are black and the post upon
which they are placed is dark gray. There is 5.9 feet from grade to the bottom of the
address number, If the sign is lowered to meet the 8 foot requirement, and if the address
number continues to be included on the sign in the same location relative to the sign panel,
the sign panel would be positioned 4.5 feet above grade, and the number would be 1.0
foot above grade. Approximately 10 feet to the north of this sign is a parking space which
may affect the visibility of this sign, depending upon the decided sign height and the
height of a vehicle occupying the space. Clearly the address number will not be visible 1.0
foot above grade.
John Richter explained the application and noted the street number is not
N noticeable. If the sign were iowered the street number would be hidden by a hedge. If
t(:; the bottom of the sign were 6 feet above grade level the sign would have a height of 9.5
feet. The street number could be at the top of the sign or elsewhere.
Bill Tiner stated the sign has an area of 24 square feet and only the height is an
issue. The building is a two story building and the sign is in proportion to it. They are
only one block from the County. They purchased the building in 1992. If it must be
lowered it would require complete removal of the sign since the poles are not wooden. A
sign 9.5 feet tall would not be seen due to the trees.
Discussion ensued regarding the nearby land uses and the fact that there are 20
foot tall signs across the street and several hundred feet down the road. Concern was
expressed that the trees would block the sign.
The Mayor noted that if the sign were lowered the trees could be trimmed at the
bottom but they cannot be topped off.
Mr. Tiner stated he received no notice that the sign was not in compliance in 1987
when it was permitted, They have done major renovations to the building but nothing was
ever said about the sign.
If
~'i.. ..'
~.,
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
24
ItJ
';.~ .', "~~ ~~,'.,..'-" ."".
'. . - " ~ ... . , '. . .' .' '.' ", ,_ ..', ~. " . . '. . ... '; ,.' '. .'. '. I . '. .':: .'.' ' .. . . ..' ,'. . .
14. Willi am W. Short, Jr. (Best Wallpaper) for a variance of 5 ft to permit a freestanding
sign 0 ft from S Belcher Rd right-of-way to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
300 Belcher Rd, S, Short & Short Sub, Lot 1, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 94-08
~i':~ Commissioner Deegan moved to allow sign with a height of 12.9 feet with the
~: " condition that if it is changed, it will be brought into conformance with the Code. The
motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken; Commissioners Berfield, Deegan,
and Thomas voted "Aye," Mayor Garvey and Commissioner Fitzgerald voted "Nay. II
Motion carried.
Deputy City Manager Kathy Rice stated that an intern and the entire meter reading
department are reviewing the City and at present, it is anticipated there is 80%
compliance regarding building numbers.
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow the freestanding sign to
remain in its present location: a setback variance of 5 feet from the required 5 feet to
allow the continuation of a freestanding sign zero feet from the S. Belcher Road right of
way. The applicant proposes to reconstruct the sign so it conforms to the area and height
requirernents of the code.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of S. Belcher Road and
Rainbow Drive, and is in the CG zoning district.
\"....~
'. .
..
. ,.....
This sign is located in a triangular paved island of the parking lot. It appears the
sign could be moved approximately 2 feet in a westerly direction, thereby bringing the sign
closer to conformance with the 5 foot setback requirement. To move the sign much more
would cause the sign to crowd the circulation aisle of the parking area. It is staff's
position that, since there is insufficient room to relocate the sign in conformance with
code, the public benefit derived from a 2 foot relocation would pale in comparison to the
cost to the applicant to accomplish such a move.
The existence of this sign with 8 zero foot setback from S. Belcher Road will not
detract from other properties in this zone that have conforming signs and will not
adversely affect the overall appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets the standards for variance approval.
John Richter explained the application. He stated staff supports the request for a
setback variance and the applicant has stated he will bring the sign itself into
conform ance.
Will Griffin stated he agrees with staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a 5 foot setback variance for the subject
property for meeting Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to the
following conditions: 1) the sign shall be made to conform to the area and height
requirements of the code, and 2) by reconstructing a sign within the street setback
!'.1
"
~;u."
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
25
~.',\".lyt/l\-'" ~.,t~..~~.'\<:J= __~y:,,;:~:,,'~ ...~. ,-I., r.:!' " . .,'
, .' ',' '; I "" ,.',' .'~' <: ~ ~. ' .: .' " , '. ".,'.. : .. , ' ~'.'; , ' . ,',,' , . . . \ ' .'. ' I'
f~~r'.,.
pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency
shall be liable for the cost of relocati ng or removing the sign in the event the property is
acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public purpose. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
15. C.G. & Suzanne 8. Gruver (Gruver's Chevron Service, Inc) for a variance to permit a
freestanding sign of 79.4 sq ft of sign area, a height of 23 ft, and located 0 ft from a
street right-of-way (N Ft Harrison Ave) where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 415 S Ft Harrison Ave, Court Square, Lots 47-61,
zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Corel. SV 94-11
The applicant is req uesting a variance to allow the continuation of a freestanding
sign 23 feet in height, 79.4 square feet in area, with no setback from the S. Ft. Harrison
Avenue right of way.
The subject property is located on the northeast corner of S. Ft. Harrison Avenue
and Chestnut Street, and is in the U C( C) zoning district.
The building on this property is located 61 feet from the S. Ft. Harrison Avenue
right of way. Given this substantial setback, it would be difficult to identify the use of this
property without a freestanding sign.
,-d",
t." .
. ,
'l'h, ,
There is no advantageous location on this property to relocate the sig'l in
conformance with the setback requirement. The site is almost entirely paved and any
relocation of the sign toward the interior of the property would cause interference with the
vehicular circulation.
The size and height of the existing sign is relatively large in comparison to the size
and height permitted for other downto wn signs. On March 21, 1994, staff and the
Commission established a direction for sign areas in downtown. That direction was to
allow properties over an acre in size to have a 64 square foot sign, and to allow properties
with less than an acre to have a 24 square foot sign. This Chevron station has a land area
of .38 acre. A 24 square foot sign, however, may be overly strict for this location. In
particular, staff notes that Pick Kwik, which is also located at this intersection and also
sells gas, is zoned Neighborhood Commercial and is permitted a 50 square foot sign.
Staff feels the applicant's request does not meet the standards for approval.
John Richter explai ned the application and noted the setback variance was
reasonable. A 24 square foot sign would be too restrictive for this property and staff feels
that 60 square feet and 20 feet high is reasonable and similar to the Pick Kwik sign across
the street.
Charlie Gruver stated he can only reduce the height to 21 feet because commercial
vehicles need 1 5 feet e1ea ranee.
minSP04a.94
4/19/94
(
'-...
26
" .' ',' " I;' l. ' .. ''', '. " ..' . , " .' " ... .' :, " '., " , . : ' . '. , . ~,' ' . :.'. ..,
.,
1fr"'W\-.
f,..JP....,.\
Mr. Shuford stated there would be three panels but they will be smaller than they
were before.
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the variance as requested but to approve a
variance to allow a freestanding sign 21 feet in height, 45 square feet in area, with no
setback from S. Ft. Harrison Avenue rig ht of way for the subject property as this meets
Section 45.24 Standards for Approval, items 1 -8. subject to the condition that by
constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and
applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or
removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain for road
widening or any other public purpose. "The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
16. D. Guv McMullen Properties, Inc (Chevron Corner Mart) for variances of (1) 1 ft in
height to permit a 21 ft high freestanding sign; and (2) 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign 0
ft from street right-of-way (Edgewater Dr) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
1901 Edqewater Dr, Sunset Point Replat, part of Lot 4 North of Sunset Point Rd less road,
zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). SV 94-12
f'
fv;,
4:.1'::.,
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing
freestanding sign to remain: 1) a height variance of 1 foot from the permitted 20 feet to
permit a freestanding sign 21 feet high, and 2) a setback variance of 5 feet from the
required 5 feet to allow a freestanding sign with a zero foot setback from the Edgewater
Drive right of way. It should be noted that, in addition to lacking a setback from the
Edgewater Drive right of way, the sign encroaches 2.28 feet into the right of way.
The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Edgewater Drive and
Sunset Point Road, and is in the CR-28 zoning district.
The sign height requested is 1 foot greater than allowed. The requested height
variance is a 5 % departure from the code. Thi s qualifies as a minimum variance.
The sign encroaches 2.28 feet into the Edgewater Drive right of way. There is no
well suited location on this property to relocate the sign. The Public Works Director
reviewed the setback variance request and has no objection. However, if in the future any
regulated feature of this sign is changed, it would be appropriate for the Public Works
Director to review such change to determ ine whether the encroachment should be
eliminated.
The existence of this 21 foot high sign with no setback from the Edgewater Drive
right of way is generally in character with signs permitted for commercial properties and
will not divert attention from nearby land uses. "The granting of these variances will not
detract from businesses that have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the
appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests meet the standards for variance approval.
(
~'~;...'
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
27
'';;~'~.~.''\,'''''>~'' ~ -"'1. ..~kt::~'\\t~..H :.~r.!,.~;;;..~.'""",;, .; ,
I " . ". ~. .... ~. ' .,.,' , . ..'.. " . ,,"..,. . ":.' .,' . ."
1f'.,;,L;....
i ~ ",
John Richter explained the applictltion and noted no one would notice the extra one
foot in height. There is no where else to relocated the sign, therefore the setback variance
is appropri ate.
Frank Kunnen agreed with staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve the requested variances for the subject
property for meeti ng Section 45.24 Stand ards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to the
following conditions: 1) in the event any regulated feature of the sign is changed, the
Public Works Director shall review the change to determined whether the encroachment
into the right or way shall be eliminated, and 2) by maintaining a sign within the street
pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency
shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is
acquired by eminent domain for road widening or any other public purpose. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued concerning a letter from Todd Pressman regarding the fact that
he did not receive notification that his request to reconsider the Doctor's Walk In Clinic
variance was scheduled at the last meeting_
Cynthia Goudeau, City Clerk, explained that any req uests for reconsideration are
placed on the next possible agenda. The applicant and/or their representative are
instructed to place their reasons for requesting reconsideration in the letter as it is not
necessary for them to be present. She explained it is not considered a public hearing
when the Commission is simply asked if they will reconsider an item. In response to a
'{... question Ms. Goudeau stated the applicant'^' anted to ke ep the sign on a temporary basis.
She pointed out that there is nothing in the rules regarding reconsideration.
The Commission requested that Mr. PreSSlllan be sent a letter asking him to provide
evidence to support reconsideration of this item.
Commissioner Deegan complimented staff on their thoroughness, examples, and
the rationale behind their direction to the Commission.
The meeting adjourned at 11 :59 a.m.
ATTEST: ~~ [, ~o. J) 0 o.
n_u City Clerk
l ".
'\:.~~-'
minSP04a.94
4/1 9/94
28