04/23/1992 (2)
DCAB
. .
DEVELOPMENT CODE AD.JUSTMENT BOARD
DATE
c27
04)z3/9~
-J7S3
:.~ .' . ~, . ", ":, ,..., t I '. : " ': " ",' ' , ...' " '. . ' .' , . ' . I ' ':,' ': - ," .
""".,
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
April 23, 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
Mary K. (Sue) Diana, Assistant City Clerk
Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:05 p.m. in the Commission
Chambers of City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised that anyone
adversely affected by any decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may
appea 1 the dec i s i on to an Appea 1 Hear i ng Off i cer wi th i n two week s. He noted
Florida law requires any applicant appealing a decision of this Board to have a
record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
Mr. Graham arrived at 1:09 p.m.
f' , In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although
~.~ not necessarily discussed in that order.
"
I. Public Hearings - requests for variances of the Land Development Code:
Item A - (continued from 4/9/92) 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 4.86 ft from a rear property line at 326
Harnden 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
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the
application has been continued to allow the applicant to present additional
information. He stated the variances are being requested to legitimize a 1,600
square-foot second-floor addition for which a building permit was issued in
error. Mr. Shuford submitted the floor plan to the Board. He stated the
applicant is requesting the variance to construct a railing to facilitate use of
the first floor roof as a deck for the second floor.
Harland Heshelow, contractor representing the applicant, stated the owners wish
to reside on the premises, the number of units on the property is within the
density requirements and the proposed railing will not extend around the entire
building. He submitted a photograph illustrating the location of the proposed
roof deck and stated FEMA was not involved due to the construction being above
the flood plane and under the 50 percent rule.
..........
OCAB
1
04/23/92
In response to questions, Ms. Shah stated she and her family formerly occupied
a small unit behind the office but moved to have more living space. She indicated
they now wish to live on the premises as it is difficult and inconvenient to
attend to guests whi le 1 iving off the premises. She stated the downstairs
portion of the building will be used as the business office.
Jugal Shahl owner and applicant, stated operating the business is a 24-hour job
and feels it is a hardship not to live on the premises. The addition would house
a family of four.
Concern was expressed regarding the possibility of the residential unit being
converted to rental units in the future.
6fi"
",' "-'\
In response to questions, Mr. Heshelow stated the railing will extend around the
corner of the building past the master bedroom. He stated the deck is only for
use outside the master bedroom, will not be used to access the second floor, will
be built on top of the existing roof and there is hardship due to the existing
building layout.
Discussion ensued with regard to the addition being in line with the original
footprint.
Concern was expressed regarding putting support posts within the setback area.
Manna Shah, owner and applicant, stated she and her husband want to enjoy the
beautiful view and add an aesthetic look to their motel.
Discussion ensued regarding legitimizing the existing unit.
">,
I Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Graham moved to grant
a variance of 3 feet to allow the permitted existing residential unit to be
constructed to within 12 feet ot the right-ot-way and variance #2 as requested
because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as
1 isted 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 applicant; the particular conditions of the property involved
and the strict application of the provisions of this development code would
result in an unnecessary hardship upon the applicant and the variances arc the
minimum necessary to overcome the hardship created by the location of the
existing building footprint on the site subject to the condition the applicnnt
shall strictly adhere to all density requirements of the Land Development Code.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Request Qranted.
Item B - (continued from 4/9/92) Branch Sunset Associates, Ltd
(Sunset Point Shopping Center) for variances of (1) 2 percent
building coverage to permit 27 percentj (2) 12.51 percent open space
for lot to permit 12.49 percent; (3) 169 parking spaces to permit
1,190 spaces; and (4) a variance of 10 ft to permit zero landscape
buffer between parking lot and U.S. 19 N right-of-way 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
,-.
DCAB
2
04/23/92
.:...,.'.,. ~ " ;" ." :/,'-'- "~I'.'.... . ..'., ,.,".'..~. +, ..',', I,'!'," .. -, ','. '. ." .'.'.. ," ",' <', "
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the
applicant is requesting the variances to allow the partial redevelopment of the
Sunset Point Shopping Center. Proposed is the removal of an existing two-story
bank building, replacing it with a one-story retail building and reconfiguring
parking spaces, landscaping and driveways. He stated the City1s Traffic
Engineering Department has expressed no objection to variance #3, indicating it
improves traffic circulation and landscaping.
Concern was expressed another retail establishment (Publix) in the center was
granted variances conditioned upon upgrading the landscaping, which has not yet
been accomplished. Staff is to investigate whether the above variances have
expired. Mr. Shuford indicated Planning and Development has a commitment with
the owner of the center to do everything possible to improve and upgrade the
property.
Nick Zarra, engineering consultant representing the applicant, stated a Walmart
will be opening in Loehmann's Plaza and Ross Dress for Less shop wants to
relocate to the Sunset Point Shopping Center. He stated he has met with the City
Forester and Traffic Engineering Departments regarding landscaping, interior
islands and improving traffic routes. He indicated the lO-foot landscaping
buffer would not be necessary with sufficient internal landscaping and the Design
Review Committee (ORC) approved the application without the buffer along U.S. 19.
Mr. Zarra indicated he is having difficulty in complying with landscaping
requirements due to existing leases with Joel & Jerry's that are very specific
that their parking space configuration not be changed in any way. Copies of the
lease were submitted to the Board. He requested approval of the variance from
the required IO-foot buffer conditioned upon an expiration date to coincide with
the expiration of Joel & Jerry1s lease.
~, In response to questions, it was indicated the redevelopment of the bank building
would eliminate nine parking spaces and the existing bank building ground floor
area contains 8,000 square feet. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not a
hardship exists.
. "
'-.
Timothy H. Powell, of Zarra Consultants, representing the applicant, indicated
it is not the applicantts desire to eliminate parking spaces, but to create a
better traffic circulation pattern as suggested by City staff.
Bill Coates, representing the applicant stated the center is thriving and a
hardship exists in the functional obsolete two-story bank building in the center
of the retail complex.
In response to a question, it was indicated the development is over the required
coverage for the site; tearing down the building and replacing with a one-story
structure would still require a parking variance.
Concern was expressed that putting in a north/south accessway would not ease the
traffic congestion problem as the dense retail use and associated parking is
primarily on the south end of the complex. Mr. Zarra feels the north/south drive
is a positive improvement and eliminates some confusion in front of the stores.
Oiscussion continued regarding the landscape buffer and the "no change in
parkingll clause in Joel & Jerryts lease with it being indicated other businesses
also have a number of parking spaces that cannot be altered. Copies of a letter
dated April 16, 1992 from Timothy Powell to the City Planning and Development
OCAB
3
04/23/92
': ,', ",." <""f~'" i ".: . "...." " ',,' ,'p., p.... I,' , . " . ,,~ ,; , .... .' " ~,. .. I.' '" . '" " ,~, .
,P':",..
I '
Department were submitted to the board. A question was raised regarding a
section of the letter relating to alternatives to immediately installing the
landscape buffer. It was indicated if this was a new site there would be no
problems with developing the center; however, everything that is changed affects
something else and there is an obligation to honor leases of the existing tenants
in trying to create a better center.
In response to questions, it was indicated additions to the Publix store are
included in the calculations for the site. Regarding water retention, it was
indicated landscaping will replace some impervious area and a fee will be paid
in lieu of drainage.
Discussion ensued with regard to parking lot reconfiguration concerns. Mr. Zarra
indicated a substantial effort has been made to satisfy City requirements. He
stated every attempt is being made to create a better, safer, more aesthetically
pleasing site.
Concern was expressed in adding a high~traffic tenant to an already congested
area.
. ,
Discussion ensued regarding building coverage and reconfiguring the parking lot
to improve traffic circulation at the busiest end of the center. A question was
raised if the code is too restrictive relating to parking ratio requirements.
In response to a question, Mr. Zarra suggested changing the corner area to
improve traffic circulation and alleviating backing out into heavy traffic flow.
He requested a continuance to revise the site plan.
Mr. Homer moved to continue this request to the meeting of May 14, 1992. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
II. Public Hearings ~ applications for land Development Code Text Amendments:
r
b.,'
1. ORDINANCE NO. 5189~92 OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODEj AMENDING SECTIONS 135.011,
135.017, 135.023, 135.029, 135.035, 135.036, 135.037, 135.043,
135.044 AND 135.045, CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM
HEIGHT FOR STRUCTURES IN ALL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE
MULTIPLE FAMILY uEIGHT" AND "TWELVEII ZONING DISTRICTS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (lDCA 92~02)
Mr. Graham moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 51B9~92 to the City
Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 5192-92 OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODEj AMENDING SECTION 137.029,
CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN LAND USE APPLICATIONS
MAY NOT BE FILED IF A SIMILAR APPLICATION RELATING TO ANY PART OF
THE SAME PROPERTY WAS DENIED WITHIN CERTAIN SPECIFIED TIME LIMITSj
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (lOCA 92~05)
Mr. Graham moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 5192-92 to the City
Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
....-..."
DCAB
4
04/23/92
,"--' "
.. ,..,,<~
, ,
I
"
l............
I
''''''...'
3. ORDINANCE NO. 5193-92 OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING SECTION 136.008,
,CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO PROVIDE FOR SPECIFIC FLOOR AREA STANDARDS FOR
CERTAIN CLASSES OF ACCESSORY USES, AND TO CLASSIFY AN INDIVIDUAL
DWELLING UNIT ATTACHED TO A HOTEL/MOTEL OFFICE AS AN ACCESSORY USE:
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (LOCA 92-06)
In response to a question, Mr. Shuford indicated the intent of the ordinance is
to provide clarification of the density/floor area ratio to give relief to small
hotels/motels in meeting required parking.
Mr. Graham moved to recommend approva 1 of Ordinance 5193-92 to the City
Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
Discussion ensued regarding the FEMA requirements relating to the 50 percent
building/flood rule. Consensus of the Board was to request a written legal
interpretation of the rule.
Discussion ensued in regard to the fee schedule for variances and it was
indicated a flat fee of $200 would be charged for residential requests.
III. Approval of Minutes of March 26, 1992 and April 9, 1992
Mr. Horner moved to approve the minutes of March 26, 1992, in accordance with
copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
Mr. Graham moved to approve the minutes of April 9, 1992, in accordance with
copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
ATTEST:
('7n Ifl
~~\, ".J/~.
Chairman ;(i
DCAB
5
04/23/92
F~
,. " -~-..
I
~'.....t~"
, ,
t~,'
ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, April 23, 1992 - 1:00 p.m. - Commission Meeting Room,
City Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
1. Public Hearings to consider
requests for variances of the Land
Development Code:
Item A - (continued from 4/9/92)
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 4.86 ft from a rear property
line at 326 Harnden 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
Item B - (continued from 4/9/92)
Branch Sunset Associates, Ltd (Sunset
Point Shopping Center) for variances
of (1) 2 percent building coverage to
permit 27 percent; (2) 12.51 percent
open space for lot to permit 12.49
percent; (3) 169 parking spaces to
permit 1,190 spaces; and (4) a
variance of 10 ft to permit zero
landscape buffer between parking lot
and u.S. 19 N right-of-way at 23660
U.S. Hwy 19 H, See 6-29-16, M&B
41.01, 41.02, 41.04, 41.05, 41.06,
zoned CC (commerc i a 1 . center) .
V 92-22
II. Public Hearings to consider
applications for the following Land
Development Code Text Amendments:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 5189-92 OF THE
CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, RELATING
TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE;
AMENDING SECTIONS 135.011, 135.017,
135.023. 135.029, 135.035, 135.036,
135.037, 135.043, 135.044 AND
135.045, CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO
INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR
STRUCTURES IN ALL SINGLE FAMILY
ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE MULTIPLE
FAMILY IIEIGHT" AND IITWELVP ZONING
DISTRICTS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. (LOCA 92-02)
DCAB
1.
Public Hearings - Variances
Item A - (1) Granted, a variance of 3
feet to allow the permitted existing
residential unit to be constructed to
withi n 12 feet of the right-of-way
and (2) Granted as requested subject
to the condition all density
requirements of the Land Development
Code shall be strictly adhered to.
Item B - Continued to May 14, 1992
II. Public Hearings - LOeTA
1.
Recommended approval
1
04/23/92
,~
.,~+..... . ~
. ,
'r.........
\
"-vI
2. ORDINANCE NO. 5192-92 OF THE
CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, RELATING
TO THE. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODEj
AMENDING SECTION 137.029, CODE OF
ORDINANCES, TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN
LAND USE APPLICATIONS MAY NOT BE
FILED IF A SIMILAR APPLICATION
RELATING TO ANY PART OF THE SAME
. PROPERTY WAS DENIED WITHIN CERTAIN
SPECIFIED TIME LIMITS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (LDCA 92-05)
3. ORDINANCE NO. 5193-92 OF THE
CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, RELATING
TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE;
AMENDING SECTION 136.008, CODE OF
ORDINANCES, TO PROVIDE FOR SPECIFIC
FLOOR AREA STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN
CLASSES OF ACCESSORY USES I AND TO
CLASSIFY AN INDIVIDUAL DWELLING UNIT
ATTACHED TO A HOTEL/MOTEL OFFICE AS
AN ACCESSORY USEj PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. (lDCA 92-06)
Ill. Approval of Minutes of
March 26, 1992 and April 9, 1992
IV. Adjournment
DCAB
2.
Recommended approval
3. Recommended approval
III. Approved as submitted
IV. Adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
2
...~\
04/23/92