04/09/1992 (2)CAB
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
DATE
00
M
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
April 9, 1992
Members present:
Alex Plisko, Chairman
Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chairman
Thomas J. Graham
Otto Gans
John W. Homer
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney
Scott Shuford, Planning Manager
Susan Stephenson, Deputy City Clerk
Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:03 p.m. in the Commission
Chambers of City Mall. He outlined the procedures and advised that anyone
adversely affected by any decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may
appeal the decision to an Appeal Hearing Officer within two weeks. He noted
Florida law requires any applicant appealing a decision of this Board to have a
record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although
not necessarily discussed in that order.
I. Time Extensions
1. (2nd request for extension - Continued from March 26, 1992)
Robert E Malke (Rose Garden Restaurant) for a variance of 14 seats
to permit 2-COP licensed establishment with 36 indoor seats at 348
and 348k Coronado Dr, Lloyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lots 118-119, zoned
CR-28 (resort commercial). V 91-17
This request was continued from the meeting of March, 26, 1992.
Robert Malke, the applicant, stated he is requesting additional time due to
economic setbacks and minor site plan changes. He stated an amended site plan
has been submitted to City staff.
Planning Manager Shuford stated an extension for a conditional use relating to
this application is scheduled to be heard on April 14, 1992. It was recommended
the requisite building permit be obtained within 45 days.
Mr. Graham moved to grant a sixty (60) day time extension in which to obtain the
requisite building permit and an eight (8) month time extension to obtain the
requisite occupational licenses from the date of this public hearing. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Time extension-granted.
?-r DCAB 1 04/09/92
II. Public Hearings
Item A - (continued from 3/26/92) Jugal B and Manna J Shah (Sea Star
Beach Resort) for variances of (1) 8 ft 4 in to permit 2nd floor
addition 6 ft 8 in from a street right-of-way; and (2) 10.14 ft to
permit 2nd floor addition 4.85 ft from a rear property line at 326
Hamden Dr, Columbia Sub No 3, Lots 3, 3a, 4, 4a, and part of Lots 2
and 2a, zoned CR 28 (resort commercial). V 92-18
This request was continued to the meeting of April 23, 1992 at the request of the
applicants' representative, Harlan Heshelow, in a letter dated April 2, 1992.
He stated it is necessary for the applicants to be in attendance to answer
questions and they will not be available until the next meeting.
1, B.J.E., Inc (bungee Maxx) for variances of (1) 145 ft to permit
crane 180 ft high; and (2) 5 ft to permit crane to be located 5 ft
from a street right-of-way at 470 Poinsettia St, Clwr Beach Park 1st
Add, Blk A, Lots 6 thru 8 and 112 of vacated alley on W, zoned CB
(beach commercial). V 92-21
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the
applicant wishes to locate a 180-foot-high crane, to be used in the operation of
a bungee jumping commercial recreation/entertainment enterprise, five feet from
the street right-of-way. He stated this hearing is for variance requests for the
proposed permanent location on lots 6 through 8. He stated the temporary
location of the operation on another site is subject to consideration of the
Planning and Zoning Board at a conditional use hearing. Concerns were expressed
regarding the crane towering over what is existing on Clearwater Beach and
several of the standards for approval not being met, Mr. Shuford stated the City
Traffic Engineering department expressed concerns regarding the potential public
safety hazard of electrical power lines in the vicinity and the parking lot not
being large enough to accommodate this use.
Discussion. ensued regarding the substandard size of the spaces seriously
impacting parking. Concern was expressed that parking for the neighboring
businesses would be affected.
In response to a question, it was indicated non-residential structures do not
have side and rear setbacks on Clearwater Beach.
Steven Watts, attorney representing the applicant, stated the proposed bungee
jumping activity is an outdoor recreational sport ideally suited for this area
and submitted nine letters of support from surrounding property owners. He
stated the height variance seems large but the crane will not impair light or
air. He felt the 5-foot setback is a minimal request.
John Mack, the applicant, explained bungee jumping is the thrill sport of the
1990's, is regulated by the National Bungee Jumping Association of America and
various safety procedures are followed. There is an airbag on the ground as an
added precaution.
OCAB 2 04/09/92
In response to questions, Mr. Mack indicated jumpers average 18 to 37 years of
age. A jump master who is certified by the national training center for the
sport will be present. Mr. Mack said he does not expect more than 30-40 jumpers
a day and his hours of operation will be between 12 noon and 10 p.m. He stated
he does not own nor is he affiliated with any other bungee jumping operation.
Mr. Watts stated Florida Power Corporation has said the adjacent power lines can
be redirected or buried. The owner of the subject property also owns adjoining
property, so providing additional parking does not pose any difficulty. He
indicated the flow of traffic will come from Mandalay Avenue and the applicant
will provide landscaping and meet all other City requirements.
In response to a question, it was indicated the applicant intends to lease the
subject property only if the variances are approved and there has been no
discussion of purchasing the parcel.
Mr. Mack stated the variance of 5 feet is being requested to provide adequate
clear space for the jump area, although it may not be needed if a certain type
of crane can be obtained. It was indicated the part of the alleyway overlapped
by the airbag has been vacated and the adjacent parcel has the same owner as the
subject property.
Nine letters were presented in support of the application.
Tom Nash, attorney representing the adjacent Beachcomber Restaurant, spoke in
opposition to the application, stating he feels this is an improper location for
this type of activity. The only hardship is economic, the operation will create
4 a nuisance, increase the congestion in the public streets, distract motorists,
increase the beach parking problem and create a poor atmosphere in the area.
Mr. Watts indicated the restaurant has sufficient parking, there are many
distractions on the beach and it is the responsibility of motorists to drive
carefully. He stated he felt the objections to the application were too general
in nature.
Concerns were expressed that the operation is dangerous, will diminish property
values and adversely affect Clearwater Beach. It was felt the only burden on the
applicant is financial and the site appears to be too small to support such an
operation. From an aesthetic perspective, it was felt the operation is a fad and
will always appear to be a temporary carnival activity rather than a regular use
acceptable on Clearwater Beach,
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Cans moved to deny the
variances as requested because the applicant has not demonstrated he has met all
of the standards for approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land
Development Code because there is no condition which is unique to the property
and any condition which is unique to the property is self-imposed by the
selection of the property by the applicant who does not have a lease, nor does
he own it, he is selecting it knowing that it is substandard; the variances are
not the minimum for the area; the request for the variances is based primarily
upon the desire of the applicant to secure a greater financial return from the
property; the granting of the variances would be materially detrimental to other
OCAS 3 04/09/92
property in the neighborhood; the granting of the variances would detract from
the appearance of the community, substantially increase the congestion in the
public streets, thereby endangering public safety, substantially diminish the
value of surrounding properties; the granting of the variances would violate the
general spirit and intent of this development code as expressed in Sections
131.005 and 131.006. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Request denied.
2. Branch Sunset Associates, Ltd (Sunset Point Shopping Center) for
variances of (1) 2 percent building coverage to permit 27 percent;
(2) 12.78 percent open space for lot to permit 12.22 percent; and
3 169 parking spaces to permit 1,190 spaces at 23660 U.S. Hwy 19
N, Sec 6-29-16, M&B 41.01, 41.02, 41.04, 41.05, 41.06, zoned CC
(commercial center). V 92-22
This item was pulled from the agenda and rescheduled due to changes in the
application. Continued to April 23, 1992.
3. William E and Helen N Sykes for variances of (1) 12 ft to permit
construction of 2nd story addition 4 ft from a rear property line;
(2) 8.27 ft to permit 2nd story addition 4.73 ft from a side
property line; and (3) 90 ft to permit construction on a 60 ft wide
lot at 421 Hamden Or, Columbia Sub No 5, Lot 3, zoned CR 28 (resort
commercial). V 92-23
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the
applicant wishes to construct a second floor addition to an existing motel unit
which serves as the owners' residence. He stated the addition will be directly
above and in line with what is existing. Staff has no objections to the request
as long as the density on the subject property is not increased.
Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the code limits the size of a resident
owner's living unit. It was indicated the owners unit is exempt from the square
footage calculations.
Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, stated the applicants desire
to expand their living quarters 1,800 square feet as their present unit is very
small in terms of living and storage area. He submitted photographs of the
subject property and indicated the proposed addition will follow the existing
footprint and will be in conformance with other second-story additions to motels
in the area. Mr. Cline stated the addition does not represent any increase in
density and is not for economic gain. He said there is a beauty salon on the
property operated solely as an accessory use which is a reasonable use of the
property with no adverse impact on the community.
In response to questions, it was stated the Sykes have owned
1983, there are four rental units in addition to the owners'
It was,indicated a proposed second floor deck appears to
conforming footprint; however, the area beneath the deck is
there is no increase in impervious area.
DCAB
4
the property since
residential unit.
increase the non-
already paved, so
04/09/92
Bill Sykes, owner and applicant, stated caretakers live in his unit every season
°i' during his absence. Mrs. Sykes operates the salon solely for the convenience of
the tenants. He said the addition will not extend over the existing carport.
Discussion ensued regarding whether or not assurance can be given that the
proposed addition will not be converted into motel units in the future. A
condition was suggested, to run with the property, prohibiting conversion of the
addition to rental units.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant
the variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the
standards for approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land Development
Code more specifically because, the variances arise from a condition which is
unique to the property and not caused by the owner or applicant and the variances
are the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship created by the small living
quarters that now exist for the owner and by the location of the existing
building on the site and the site development partially predating the current
Land Development Code, which is common on Clearwater Beach, subject to the
conditions: l.) the proposed second story addition shall be an expansion of the
existing single story living unit and no additional motel/hotel or living units
shall be created; 2) the building plan submitted for review by the City for this
addition shall clearly state that the proposed addition is an expansion of the
existing living unit only; 3) the site plan shall be accordingly prepared to
reflect condition #2 above and the addition shall be developed as indicated on
the submitted site plan and 4) the requisite building permit shall be obtained
within six (G) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Request granted.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
Discussion ensued regarding the relationship of the 50 percent value rule to the
Sykes application.
Discussion continued regarding bungee jumping in Pinellas County. Concern was
expressed regarding whether or not there is any liability to the City. Assistant
City Attorney Lance stated there would be no City liability unless the activity
was conducted on City-owned property or sponsored by the City in some manner.
The Planning Manager indicated the 30-foot height limit, the flood zone issue,
and rules regarding reapplication for substantially similar variances are being
addressed with Land Development Code text amendments. He gave Board members a
copy of a memo related to problems involving accessory uses with alcoholic
beverages for their information.
Mr. Lance left the meeting at 2:31 p.m.
Discussion continued regarding whether or not a particular parking lot had a
permit for a commercial parking lot and it was stated they do not. There was
also discussion regarding parking of cars in front yards.
?.. DCAB 5 04/00/92
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned,at 2:40 p.m.
F
DCAB
6
04/09/92
Chairman
ATTEST:
Wssistaff. ty Clerk
ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, April 9, 1992 - 1:00 p.m. - Commission Meeting Room,
City Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
s,
To consider requests for variances of the Land Development Code:
I. Time Extensions
1. (2nd request for extension)
Robert E Malke (Rose Garden
Restaurant) for a variance of 14
seats to permit 2-COP licensed
establishment with 36 indoor seats at
348 and 348k Coronado Or, Lloyd-
White-Skinner Sub, Lots 118-119,
zoned CR-28 (resort commercial).
V 91-17
II. Public Hearings
Item A - (continued from 3/26/92)
Juga 1 B and Manna J Shah (Sea Star
Beach Resort) for variances of (1) 8
ft 4 in to permit 2nd floor addition
6 ft 8 in from a street right-of-way;
and (2) 10.14 ft to permit 2nd floor
addition 4.85 ft from a rear property
line at 326 Hamden Dr, Columbia Sub
No 3, Lots 3, 3a, 4, 4a, and part of
Lots 2 and 2a, zoned CR 28 (resort
commercial). V 92-18
1. B.J.E., Inc (Bungee Maxx) for
variances of (1) 145 ft to permit
crane 180 ft high; and (2) 5 ft to
permit crane to be located 5 ft from
a street right-of-way at 470
Poinsettia St, C1wr Beach Park 1st
Add, Blk A, Lots 6 thru 8 and 1/2 of
vacated alley on W, zoned CB (beach
commercial). V 92-21
DCAB
1. Time Extensions
1'. Granted sixty (60) days
extension to obtain the requisite
building permit and eight (8) months
to obtain the requisite occupational
licenses from the date of this public
hearing.
II. Public Hearings
Item A - Continued to April 23, 1992
1. Denied
04/09!92
2. Branch Sunset Associates Ltd
(Sunset Point Shopping Center for
variances of (1) 2 percent buildin
coverage to permit 27 percent; (2}
12.78 percent open space for lot to
permit 12.22 percent; and (3) 169
parking spaces to permit 1,190 spaces
at 23660 U.S. Hwy 19 N, Sec 6-29-16,
M&B 41.01, 41.02, 41.04, 41.05,
41.06, zoned CC (commercial center).
V 92-22
2. Continued to April 23, 1992
r
3. William C and Helen N Sykes for
variances of (1) 12 ft to permit
construction of 2nd story addition 4
ft from a rear property line; (2)
8.27 ft to permit 2nd story addition
4.73 ft from a side property line;
and (3) 90 ft to permit construction
on a 60 ft wide lot at 421 Hamden Dr,
Columbia Sub No 5, Lot 3, zoned CR 28
(resort commercial). V 92-23
III. Board and Staff Discussion
IV. Adjournment
3. Granted subject to the
following conditions: 1) the
proposed second story addition shall
be an expansion of the existing
single story living unit and no
additional motel/hotel or living
units shall be created; 2) the
building plan submitted for review by
the City for this addition shall
clearly state that the proposed
addition is an expansion of the
existing living unit only; 3) the
site plan shall be accordingly
prepared to reflect condition #2
above and 'the addition shall be
developed as indicated on the
submitted site plan and 4) the
requisite building permit shall be
obtained within six (6) months from
the date of this public hearing.
III.
IV. Adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
DCAB 2 04/09/92