Loading...
05/19/1964 \: .:~ ,:: ~f : ':, l; ,:: : I~' .'.' ',:: : ": :' ,'.'> ,~'.,'.'.: ': . :3, : I, I.~, ~;,.~,: II. I::', I'!' ,= ':: : ' ~ I . ' ;. I .' . j ': I " ~ ~ ':,' ", ,: ,j: 't ~ ..' . I ',"'; . , '. : :. :'.. ..~, I,; '. ; ~ ~ :,' :.: '~. ::-:. ~; . ,'.' . '. .\' :'. ; , .' ; .'..... ". '.. ~ .: .... " ~'~: "Ej ~I: It..;" I' '~ .:... >: " ,.,',..: ~ . .,:: '. , , , . ~ . THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD J ~ Minutes of the Meeting, Tuesday, May'19, 1964. The meeting was called to order at 3:30 P. M. hy the Chairman, Mr. Kruse. Present were Membevs Mylander, Williams, Reade) Gates, Galloway and Swan, and Mr. \~olle ~ . The Minutes of the meetings of April 2l~ April 20, and Mft~ 5, 1964, were approved as submitted in written Dununation to each member. ZONING FOR ANNEXATIONS INTENT ORDINANCE fllOl5 - The Planner loca- ............ .........-........-_____.-- ~.._...,... "II>. r """"'<117'--"'__ .r-", I . '''"......~ ted the fOllowing properties as described ;tn above Intent to Annex Or- dinance *1015 and pointed out the p~esent land use in area, present and pI'oposed zoning: Parcel (a) 9akl~ .." H~~Bht.s...J?y.,l?di vi.!!!! o!l.L..h2~",...~?-}..~_,....., inc 1 us..! ve Requested zoning: "B", Business (presently zoned County R-4, residential) These lots on the east side of Lincoln Ave. facing into the Sears Store parking lot were described as vacant and under one ownership" Location was pointed out as between single-famiiy occupied lots at the north and south ends of the block and abutting single-family lots in the east half of the block. Housing .in this block was noted to be frame homes of an older type. The Planner informed the Board that he was hoping that both the north and south blocks of . Oakland Heights could be master zoned, so that annexations ~ould conform to a master-zoning plan. Mr~ Wolle recom- . , " mended PRS zoning for Lots 43-ll9 because of lot depth and was because request/ only for the 7 lots. He indicated that he might favor, "Bu zoning for the entire south block .... ....j in that the size of the lot would not then predete-rmi'ne the size of the building~ He further stc:.ted that he would favor some kind of multi-family zoning for the north block (Presently zoned County M-2) which faces into the rear of the Sears Town stores. After some discussi.on, ~q!2..J11ot~.qn I: P & Z Bd Minutes 5/1.9 /611 Page fl.2 Cl'~ Py 11~.: GalJow.EL1 seqonded..~.zuM:r!o.....!'J1)i!nd(;u'., ~he,)?2.?!.'d voted unaniJl!plis.lJL :t2 .~Q~usL..tllat_.tu.s" ,~~~USJ3.t...i.9r ~j},:~o_~i.n.R~fO;t.1DlQj~c.\,.1&t~ ~lLL ~w:ni~--nn.<l...t.2..xg~mrmq,~i.th-L~J?x.QJ~i2D.s1!, ,and..ht=- la1eq ~~r.xi.c.tU4..Ji.2n.iT.UL9~.hiPM~'l.. Parcel (b) ~~t~s .,!~d B~_~.9.:l, s~u.th of J~~v-,,"-~}'~L~.,!pditi:.!.ion.. (a..p.p.ro'to.. ~OO~,2S.,,~'pO--.'),"...-~E-!:.2.t..l.?: ~~v~,La.n..d SuM!.~i.2!l Recommended PRS - (presently zoned County C-2) - General location was described as south of the southwest corner of Belleai:r Blvd~ and Missouri Ave. (Intended Use: site of Second City National Bank). The Planner informed the Board that: Frontage on Belleair Blvd. is platted. Request was for zoning "so as to permit the erection of a bank building thereon". Banks wc:re a permitted use in the PRS, Professional and Related Services, District~ His recommendation was for PRS zoning.. The parcel becomes contiguous to the city limits through inclusion of above Lot 17 in the annexation.. Access to Belleair Blvd.. would be provided through this lot.. After some discussion, upo~~~ot~n of Mr. Wil1iam~~ second~d bv Mr~,~~es, the Board voted ~~A~O~sl~-!o recomm~nd ER~,_Professional and R~JaT.ed,_. ~ervis~s.. Z.2.u..iU8..i9.~ ann~X~.ii.Q!l. of t3UJ2.:U~ct .l?!'-Q:Q.ex.:tw.. In discussion of the motion, Mru Gates questioned why owners did not plat the parcel instead of annexing it as metes and boundsn Board opinion seemed to be that while this would be desirable for convenience of reference, it could not.be made mandatory. .t,' I the annexation as C?ne ,parcel for one use. M~o Wolle stated that he was considering Parcel (c) Lot ~nset Highlands SUbdivision", Unit 2 - on north ~ sJ.d.e SunsetPO:Git" ROad- - ...-.- _0,'..._ ......__ _ . u ~_.............-- :-....) Single-family used adjoining platting of this existing R-IE City subdivisionu The successive annexation of the few remaining county area Iota in this unit was explained. P E Z Bd Minutes 5/19/64 Page 1#3 Parcel (d) ,~~O'1~l1lo!!on of 11!:. Williams 2-~?!lde~.",l?Y Mr. S'!an, ,tQ!! ~~oar,cJ...~ote.9.. unavnimo.!!.tt!Y t~:J:~c~mrT!,e...lJ!LJ.:.1F;.l SAnp,l e J FaJ.n.ili, !!ltl.!-Il8... fOl:,..a.nnex~ti-on .of., !!Y!U~U2...U. Northeast cornet" U. S. 19 and SH 60 - Part of Sec. 17-Twp. .T----'-<1 TI...n...........~.....-..-.UI .......... ...... b-.... .....IL_____~ 1"1....., ~ ",__~ 1_ -- ............ (~ 298, R16E -, .Ea!.~, sis!! of w U.. S" ,~9) - Size of parcel was generally described to the Board as a strip 230' in depth extending 330 feet north f'r'om the City Gu).f-to-Bay fl B" zona at this corner. The Planner advised that: " Intended use was for a motel (reportedly Friendship Inn) which would involve portion of property presently in the City and this additional annexation parcel.. Request by applicants was for zoning commercial use or such other p~o- pe~, zoning classification as will permit the operation of a motel, gift shop, and other pertinent and supplementary business pertaining to the operation of a motel.. He had talked with Mrw Weiss, sales representative, and with an owner of part of the property, and had learned that Mr. Wightman will handle this propertyw He had ,brought up the point of a proposal for PKB zoning in discussion with Mro Weiss, who, himself, seemed agreeable to this type of zoning~ Representatives of the Holliday Inn people had been in to see him to discuss design requirements and had seemed agreeable to a 40 ft. front setback for their facility planned for the west side of U. S. 19, north of the Howard Johnson site,. even though it will be in a USn zone. He had been unable to contact Mr" Wightman directly as yet, so did not know whether applicants' plans will con- form to PKB zoningy The Planner recommended a fo~mal expression from the Board to the effect that it would desire PKB zoning (as was the intent in setting up. this classification). After some discussion, !1!:.~_~!es.. .!!!.ov~d "\h<?t. the BoarQ_ recomm~J]d Pl$lb..-R.a~l{a~ ,)~~irteBs..1 zoni,..ng_.f.q~'pj!l.q1""p"al"'c,g 1_in...SJit9_..-17.::- 29-],6 q.~ des9Fib~d i!!-ln.tent.,. QJ:giD.a.n~~...Ql.~.._.. .tl.~.._rnot~Q.~ecQILcl~d by... .~-~ >_.' Mr ~ ,Swan ~ FJ!.~J?..;\s_~e...9. un an.;llug.us lxl " , t_, ,; P &Z Bd Hinutes 5/1 9/61J Page OIJ RE9-YJ.~_! rqR COUN~..L!O....., ~'F-"UDt RF~~ONING OF Al~~9!, us ~1.L'tQ.._PlSJl..::. ~"'" The Planner reviewed City and County zoning on US 19 as it involved existing ,:md proposed development along the c:t ty limits And abutting ouch right-af-tolay. The City and County parkwc"iY zoning pel"mi tted t1Sf!S and restrictions were enumerated. There was a discussion of the in- tent of the new par~way zoning classification as it would apply to U. S. 19a The Planner referred to previous discussions by the Board con- cerning the future setbaclc, development, and characte~ of U. S. 19. It had been agreed that to accomplish this most of this Ci.ty and County zonin g should be re la ted or the same. Mr.. \'1011 c re la ted that, ha ving checked with Mr. Page of the County Planning Department, it was deter- mined that the City should l"'equest zoning studies be made by the County which may justify the County usage and application of their P-C, Parkway Commercial, to this highway frontage along the City of Clearwater's right-oi-way. Mr. Wolle then requested that the Chairman or the Board -... , arrange to have a letter to the County Boat'd of Commissioners fr-om the Ci~y expressing its desire to have the County make a study of this area and work out something in zoning that would match the City's. After some discussion, I1r,..... Ga....tes ..!!!2Y!;'~ tha:L;!!1.!LSh'~l:~.~l}~ 1?..~epa~~ ~ha1:~ve~u..u- !~r he !l1.i!lks .A~~tI"able a!!-2...,:t!:n:g,.lli!h ~Y!M.'!S.l!.P~_~.!ll!.~D~ t"hj..nls.q,.M..:.... ili~b l~,~jjiJZ~.mQ.ti.2n..~~D.9.M _by M~..:....l:1Y..i9.m.le...!'.,.'!....t:!~--P.a~~d ~ UTl~nirn.9..lJ.~"- ZONING REQUEST - LOT 53. BAYS IDE SUBDIVISION - SOUTHEAST CORNER HAtIDEN AND "DEV6NDRm-:~"CLEAmTERBCH-:-::-'fROM"R:TE-f5 If-=if - y- ?A~ ff- Z: ~Zi::Z;.:?:):l-~---~-:-~'--'-_.~-'----------~- It was bt'ought out that the appl~cant (C. H. Hubert) also owns the .'.-.-J single family residence on Lot 52 abutting this property to the east; further that the opposite corner of Harnden a.nd Devon Drive is occupied by a substantial single family residence and that the total 'Devon Drive finger is zoned R-IE and is developed as sinp,le family. Mr~ Galloway read to the Board Reason for Request as stated in application, as follows: .. ': ' ,,: :,. ~ " ,'~. : I : :.' I ~, ,,'. .' :', \'. : ~;, " , ~""!' j ,.,' ,...: I ,.,. ~ 'I, : -: ,I,' , ...: I: ,; I L':~', ~.', l': ',: ,-. :., . ..'. ',' " ", ' , " .: ~ , ' / '.., '. ":: ,:':."., I I. ,.,' .~, ','.' " ..... , '. .:.,...".. '+\ ... ~:/' J \ I L, ~',,: ; ,...1 i '"I ~: :~ ~', ' : J ',',.':. ~",:" , '",.,. ."",.'" ~ '\, ';, t '1 1 ..', P & Z Bd Minutes 5/19/64 PURe '5 ~ rtLot cannot be properly utiJ.iz'~d under pr~sent zoning. Owner wants,to sell - or will build one story CBS apartment buildinR. Not to exceed rive (5) unito Hith ample off-street pi'lrkinp, and access only off Hamdenw" After review and discussion ~ which 1~eveal'3d that the Bocu.d fearod tht1t approval of the request might set ill1 undesirable precedent, mg..!i2..t} ...~U- ma de by .l!l:~ ~.l~~.9.L!!tA!:-i:ry!L..!.t92.ES!J:f>~~.D-..9_.sli!!PJ2.'P.s..9~a.1....Q.Lauhjg~...I'A::. gy,es ~.B.- 4.... :fQ:r...~lt9S ,5.~..t. .Ba~.:1.Q.e ~'Jbdi~d.~i.Qn-,..:in 1h~-5.lli:li- 1&D1tuul.9J~:t.>t J}l\:L~.s!Wl"p.}~~,g~~tf es.t...sm__~.t>.mtin.&-9.lJ.~Jlt...tiwU..e- ~Jl.~Jld mi!Y ~. C'J:.~P-:..t.f..../!...9i~tr.as:t~.Y..fL~..~fll'....~j;,b..U~nJ).cU1t- ' }'~J3 i. d~~~.A.~n..t.r_CAnC'.:...e~u_,,_.tU.~mQ.tJ..2n~,_.9~~'l.9.D.~Q.....1?Ltlr..1:.-~lll1J.J!..l'ls ",^,...~aL p.1!sse.1LJ.tJli!.Q!mgY.~lL.._ CONTINUATION OF SIGN ORDINANCE STUDY - LETTER MEMO .. SIGNS - r~.....-.......'...a.-..u.~...I~""""'_._'~""""""'1-_V~'l1l. ~1"""""--W~~~~"'" pI~",- ~NAGE13. - ConceI"ning memorand\nns forwat"ded in regard to Board ap- p~oval of two sign applications~ Mr. Kruse read to the Board text of a May 15 memo~andum received from the City t1anager regarding these sign recommendations as follows: liThe City commission has requested that you please clarify your recommendations for their approval or disapproval regarding the placing of Commercial Adve~tising Signs on the thoroughfares of the City. They were particularly concerned about the way that the last two memos on this subject were wordedw In each one of them it was stated that "The Board reaffirms its opinion that some action should be initiated to' control (or even forbid) the erection of commercial advertising signs on our avenues of approach to the City.. "Perhaps you should forwal'd to us your suggestions fop a proper ordinance 'to accomplish what you would like in this regat'd. n Hr. Kruse made reference to ASLA POlicy Nlj. 16, BILl.BOARDS, as approved by the Board of 'rrustees of the Amel~ican Society of Landscape. Archi- tects, Jan. 3, 1964, policy statement as follows: "The American Society of Landscape Architects favors control.and regulation of advertising signs which ar>e likely through offense to the sight, to impair the value' 'of pUbli.c or private property. Control under the' police pm'Jel~ of the State is recommended when other methods are not effective. fI . ~ ....,..,r He quoted in part from a following ASLA commentary in support of "the Society's recommendation, to the effect that billboards "are essentially :':h.,..~:,:\~~.:-...:..I.~ ..t:'~~'.'~::I:"~'::"'~~1 ,.:".~".:...::":+;...::.!.j::.': ';'::'::""':t':.I',;:'~~'::"::. /::',~l<:"~""".'I.':';' ';.', ,.,'~ '." I . . " '.+:;' ~'.',.I:: ~.; .'..,....."..':.:~.l..:...~...':::.:.'....::.....~.,.;:'...::.:.. p S Z Bd. Minutes 5/19 /6 If Pap,c Ii G an invnoiori of privacy, a misfit, an anomaly; even if they wore Rreat WOl"}cS ,of art, they \o1ould be grotesquely out of plnce j n brHl11ti rul (~ scenery. . . . etc. tr , The Chairman expres9~d the opinion 'that (1ction On the rcql..luat con- tained in the above City 'Manager" s memo would nacessa-rily be deferred pending further prog.ress in preparation of sign proposals to. be sub- mitted to the Board. .r"-..... In response to a prior Doavd request for background material for reference, the Planner proj~cted (by opaque rnachine) paragraphs J(a) and J (b) from a Manatee County ordinance concerning removal or alteration of signs and spacing limitations. He reported that to date he had not been able to find a city ordinance -that prohibited commerci.al advertising signs. Mr. Wolle discUGseo i.n some detail provisions of a proposal in preparation-for restriction of billboards in certain areas (along a number of streets that have stz'ip business zoning) where he felt they would be out of character. Mr. Wolle stated that he would like to , spot all existing billboards on a map, as the ordinance proposals he was working on were based on the fact that a majority of signs are on- premises signs. Aftet' some l~ore inconclusive discus'sion) Mr. Krus~ - r recpmmended that _6in~e~..!'k.:-.lUlaJl~.r.._~w_~_1_e~~'y-iJ)P... on~ .~",..sho~l' ~:i.~--. fu_c:uss iQllU~,SSm..t.iP..!.utdT aJ~t..e..~rJ:1~,..)jilin.g~.I'.ej;;.u:r.J.lt_-.lI~s:loe d that- i f in j:~ TIl!it~D.:t.ime..l:1.t:.~_j~1,~lJfl.g-J!1n.tfl.g-:t.Q. ~!L1~_9..J.Wr,;Y~~l.r.dA......:thiL ~O.Ml..<L.th.'W-~~_q].) lS'~JQ.:r'~ jJ!.~..J?211.~i~!L.~.niRJ2ffifJ..ti.9..tl.....-tl.~mh.e.r.~._~QJ1.mtr.r.~d - ~i tll th.fJ_Q..~~----r..~,g.m1J~D.f!sJ:.tc;~n:... ~ L CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS P'g.....Z11EETmG-UMPA - rrHUgSDAY THROUGH SA'l'" - HAY 21-23 - ",~_"'~~~~_-'I'I ~1..fiI.__.-""""-__ 1 ~'-""-"'--'f~ J'W r.......~-.-'lr~~~ MernbeJ:ls were. reminded ofth.~~ Fifth Annual Conrel'ence on Planning and ....' Zoning to be held at 'the Hillsboro Hotel under the sponsorship of the St. Association of County Planning and Zoning Dir'ectoT's. It was noted that some of the presentations scheduled concerned zoning law. Mr. Wolle ~ .' , ':, . 0' ,': 0"':': ,: .' i,:,:.;,:',':.' " " . '::"" 'I ' ::.,' ; , 0: :,.0. fO' , '," \' . " ' .:: ':' ,0 I, ''. : ',: : I .' . II ~', ", '\ :. , ' .:' ' ~.':" ':":. ".:.~ ':,', '.' " I ,\ :"':',::', : , . ~ ,'. ',' . ~ ~ ,.;' ~ ",:, ", . ,.' ! " ~ .', '.: .' , ':', ' ,:,'.. \ ;':,' 'J' I :'~ " ' ,\,: ': '\ _ ' , P I) Z Bd Minutos 5/19 161~ Puga N 7 ~~ announced that he, wns planni 1"lR, to nttend the nfter'noon ueaaions and the) Saturday Dunnion. FHA ..lJ.t.?!J~.!!~&.rQ~.!-.:._1:.l~.tJ~l1~J!!!!.:tE[YB.&!:..~..t~~1EL::." ,HQ~mliX.Jl, ~li1....LQ..l.1Q..3~lL.-" ^ttel1danc(~ by any interested membl.!I"$ was racommendt~d. It 'HuH learnea 'that the Plannor' and MI'. Don Will i.ama planned to attend thi~ forum. ABSENCE OF CHAIRNAN - r1!'y Kruse reported that he would be leaving _____1""'lI~_~ ............,..-......~..........-........_ on Monday, May 25'J to a:tte:"H.1 a Rotin"'y Cozlvention in Canada and for a visit -to New York and would be a'l-iay for u time. "i'he BOilrd was infol"med, that lofr. Reade liQuId take ove!' while he t",as gone. I " NEW BOARD MEMBER - Mr. KT."ut!;e repol'1:ecl that he had 1:alked 'to I1r. -..~.....-_--. ~ 'M'Io*_._-.....a.. Logan and that he. is 'accep'ting the appointment to serve, on thf! Board.. The ~haiI"man info,rmed the Board 'that tiember Harries had ,left the week 'before for Buffalo, N(;1.w Yor.k.' PLANNER'S ITEMS ' Cffl-ffm~NNING OFFICE - Membel"s were informed that a draw- ~ ...~__...~-y II""' M.t.I!b....4~'~~.............-"..~ ing showing the space to be assigned to the Planning Office in 'the new ci tyhall was nvailuble in h5.s office. as inform,rtion.. Planning liteI~ture was distributed. ,', The meeti.ng Has adjol.1.'f\\i.ed at 5: 15 p" M~ " Respectfully submitted, ~~~'AU'_" r", Wolle, Sec' y Planner " ~ '.. \ --....' I: