09/14/1965
-;,~..' :..'., : '+ " ".' .:. :: .i '-'" ::' " ;:"," ::~' ':; ~" ,':. ,',; ~', . I, ;.' '....( :'.: ,:': .... .r.'.;'; .~ I :, \: ',\'~:' I'.:: r' ';'.' ".:\' :::' .< .:,': ;: .' .::~. ;..." :~\'!' ,': ..,";':'.:~'::.'~ /<', ',:~ ,;:>'.:;:/ ~/.':"f :l';' ,<,: '';'\' ',' ':: :L 'i.I:.'!:, '.:' . ~ i, ',~ ~/)" "-/..; .\';<. ;,', ...~:'.~ ~:.'
I
Tut PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
Minutes of the MeatinE, Tuesday, September 14, lUtib.
"....." The meeting wan called to order at 3: 00 P.. H. by the Chairman,
Mr. Kruse. Present were Membero Reade, Butler, Galloway"Myland~~ and
Iley, t1r" Rettig of the Engineeri.ng Department, and Mr. Wolle.
The Chairman welcomed Mr. Reade and Mr. Wolle who were back from vaca-
tions. A letter recently received by Mr. Kruse from Member HaY.'ries
was passed to the Board to read.
The minutes of the meeting of August 31, 1965, w(~re approved
as submitted in wri1:ten summation to each member.
,.
, """"
...~-,
'".-"
,
"
~OJlJ1LCL;:.~B..~tJG ae.PJ~tcA~IJlij ~J"'1t;RO!i_~..:l2.9_&:.L=....bQTS 5 &, _6 ~
BLO~!-<-_~.JU.llllJl'l^RDJL I TS DE LEON & SAN JiEttO 2..:: _~P.2.~AN.T..;..
!rER:MA~..!.c.o.nt.in],I,~Qm Iti 31/6.5J..-=..~,f;;Ql:ll:11J'j;ID='~..QltL.-
Reas6n for request as stated in applica~ion was ~o provide pa~king
to,se~ve business buildings on Lots 1~ 2, B 3, Elk. F, on the Gulf-to-
Bay frontage. Mr.. Galloway reported the Zoni.ng Committee's recommenda-
tion for approval of this request. He advised that site inspec~ion mad~
by members showed improvements on the property now to be multi-family
in character (3 small duplex units) and that the applicant sorely
needed an expanded parking area because of the limited depth of the
Gulf-to-Bay Business strip. He stated that three of the coJtlmitte'e
agreed that they could see no objeotion to the change to R-~. ,The
Bt?ard V01.e1J j:p ''l,P.~Ye .:tb~.....Z.OI\;i:Q2 CQ1!IDJi.I!:!tU~.pt"t 't ..flEe! ..P..~.l11ID.t ,t1l.I'J.n-
~end approval for change to R-q for Lots 5 and 6, Block F,
......--~-...... . r__ "'T IT JT 1 ....~ 1 ....,.fI,_~ ~.I"""_'" L1-----..-:..t ....TF ~ L IV.....) I ~
Boulevard Heightsv
~~~~
SERVICE STATION - NE COR. NICHOLSON & N~ MYRTLE AVE. (T.;OTS 7, 8,& 9,
BLK. 3~ PIHECREST SUB.. [OIL CO. NOT INDICATED)} - AL RuGERO<t REPT. -
(continued from 8/31/55)
Hembers reviewed 8i te plan fOl' this service station. Expl"'1nat~.on
was given that the stati.on would occupy a corner and hove ~ l1oJ"lmnl
site area, and that Myrtle Ave. adjoining the site was alre~dy an im-
proved street.. Note \>Tas made of the R-2 zone imrf'led:i..,tely to the east.
The Plannr;!I" reported that he could see no objecticm to the plan. The
~d. vot~d .to pec:omrn,end. aJ?.Et"o'{al 0; _t.he a~~~.,s.i.te...2..~ subjeqt -1~_
,f
.1' \'. '{I ~:' :. \.",~ ' '. '.'..,~:.,:. " '.,':}:I. l' ~::~..:.. ,:.t' '.' l~. ('.', .... ~..: ':;';" ..::':...".:".. ','t::::', :,".:d.'::,:"-:~';,;''':''': .....: :'....'. .", ... .:'.... .~..I.'.'.,~.:..:.:...~i. ':\::".>' '::("::~' .... ~.' ':',,'l'::',' ''", n.,:.\:,:.;,:~.'..'''''':,I,.
PiZ Bd. Minutas
9/14/65 P,'lge U2
...,""""
~......F~~i!.s.!!l!!!!!~-.ef...,"..!!!f:....f.1'!y_..~ng!1!~..!':..t. ~ It 'lo1."lS a gI'll! ad the. t the re com;"
mendation fo'X'\.mrded would indi,catc screening requirement for aervice
station sites abutting ~egidential dist~icts, as included in Zoning
Amending Ordinance No.. 1050.. Sec. 26-6-A( 3) (g).
SERVrcB ST~ON - SW COR~ LAKEVIEW & SO. FT. HARRISON (LOT 1~
llit~:ii;_:lit~1.~Jli~rrhB-7j;~~~i@i~mm:~gg:it.~i~:IEqm,-eJ~fffi":;::=_
The Board reviewed site plan for this set'vice station" Mr. Wolle
repor-ted that Subdi visi.on . Committee membera had made a site survey.
Explanati.on was given 'that the Ass"t. City I:ngineer had previously re-
ceived and made notation on the plans and that the City Traffic Planner's
no1:es thereon indicKted disapproval. MI'. Reade reported recommendation
of the Subdivision Co~nittee to disapprove the above Bi~e plans on the
grounds that: (1' the 50' x 100' lot size was inadequate; and (2) that
'-the location at such a critical interscction, wi tl1 inadequate approach
areast would create unsafe and inconvenient entry and exit.
The Board
~....
'~1
vote_c!.~tE. _a.E..~U~.!'!!comme~c!e.t~on C?L th~~Sub~.~.ion Comm!.tteTe,. and
Eur~~an~ ~R~~to~ to recomm~~~disa~~~~a~.
CAS il71
So. side Gulf-to-Bay SUNAD
Towers Property~ 3QO' east of Bamboo Lane
After' some discussion) .!he Board vo~~<t....!p.'ye9_omm~nd disap~rovvaJ ,__
~f....~omme~cE1._A<!~~tis,in~_~~~~ __CAS )#71,~,1i th__~p-eti t-i,on l~f1d dUElic_a:t~.!?!l_
of r a,c1:~911-2.!l.LPL'oc~E.!!~~!?1!.C!.~ed .? !....!!!.t;...1.~.E~~~~!EJL~.2.COr:d2s!,Jn
~.mtT!~_t~i...2!-^!J.E!!~l~~h-~ll.
SImeS - LETTER CLEARWATER BOARD OF REALTORS R'E SIGN ORDINANCE -
T..~~ """""It...... v- ~~ -- ~-......____, ___~ ~ _~~...... ~ ~ ...."'..-....-...-~~--
'The Chairman presented copy of a letteT' dated 9/8/65 which had
been submitted to the City l1anager by the Clean'Tater-l.argo Board of
Realtors making report cov~ring its study of the proposed sign ordinance.
Recognizing that the CommisRion had requested the Planning nnd Loning
_/ Board to discuss the sign ordi.niince ~:i tIt the Comm~l"'cial Advertisi ng people
......-...
/,........
,
.~/
P Ii Z BeL Min\ltca n/lff/65 Pnfl6 113
wl)(m d<!veloping the Commel"ciAl Adv.!Ittising IIi p,n section" the Board
felt it doairnbla that the on-site ttigno, itS well (,lGthQ off-site.
signa, nhould be discussed with the Clearwater Board of Rer11tof1s, in
order to carry out the intent of practicality in sign ordinance pro-
posals. Wi-tIt such need apparent, MI'.. IIey was directed to consult with
the Realtor Board committee to determ~n6 if arrangement could be made
whereby both boards might jointly discuss features of the proposed
ordinance. At such meeting clarification of some p~opogals would be
made and the practicality of other measu~ee would ,be discussed..
!:!!::....,19:q~~- reyop..,t:ed tha~.,..tEe ~!2.!!!!.!.~n from the E9~~wa:!~-1P.iY!t
~~!n. wC!.s.....!:.~..e.g_~. t!1e 1i~ill:i. ~,?~~s_~_!nee,.t~n.B" He further ad-
vised that in the di.Bcusaion which followed, Commissioner Insco llad made
recommendation that the proper Dunedin authorities might be brought in-"
to the picture, as well as the possibility of another causeway to the
beach, the widening of the bridge over Stevenson C~eek, etc. Mr. Kruse
indicated that, the Planning Board might be requested to make a survey and
~ecornmendation in these matters and that a study of Alte~nate 19'which
the County is undertaking would correlate certain datap
Mro Wolle reported on ~rranRement mad~ ~it~the c~~y Man~ger to
~i8t~i~ute ~~O~oK"She remainJJ!ar~o~i~~pf t~~ Cqmp-~ehens~e p~~~.~~~~
Jhe .G~~~er Cha~ber of Commer~~. He stated that 20 copies were being
retained for the Planning Office and solicited Board opinion as to the
number to bl'.! reserved for Board members. It was agreed that 20 copies
would be sufficient for this purpose~
Planning literature was distributed.
The meeting was adjourned at ~:45 P. M.
"
,~
..
,