10/08/1992 (2)
, ..
. ., ".' , . j'" ~r:t
DCAB
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
,DATE
c27-
.....~\
Id/uju.
,
t?::)cY
~."
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJOSTMENT BOARD
October 8, 1992
Members present:
Alex Plisko, Chairman
Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chairman
otto Gans
John W. Horner (arrived 1:30 p.m.)
John B. Johnson
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant city Attorney (arrived 1:09 p.m.)
Scott Shuford, planning Manager
Mary K. Diana, Assistant City Clerk
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:00 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 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. Public Hearings
Item A - (continued from 9/10/92) Valentino Koumoulidis
to reconsider previous request for variances of (1) 83 ft
to permit a 67ft w ide lot i (2) 3 park i ng spaces to
permit 6 spaces i (3) 24.85% front yard open space to
allow 25.15%; (4) 3.5 ft to permit 1.5 ft of perimeter
landscape buffering; and (5) 12.8 ft to permit zero ft of
clear space at 606 Bayway Blvd, Bayside Sub No 5, Blk A,
Lot 7, zoned CR 28 (resort commercial). V 91-25
This item was continued from the september 10, 1992 meeting due to
a tie vote. The request.' is for reconsideration of five variances
to permit the conversion of a six-unit apartment building to, under
the initial request, a first floor restaurant and a two-unit
apartment building on the second floor.
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail
stating the applicant has revised the request and wishes to convert
an existing six-unit apartment building into one living unit on the
second floor and approximately 1,617 square feet of retail space on
the first floor.
DCAB
1
10/08/92
David Himes, representing the applicant, stated variance #2 had
been withdrawn at the September 10 meeting. He gave a brief
history of the application, stating after the original variances
were granted, changes were made which delayed the proposal. During
a request for time extension, concerns were expressed regarding
these changes.
In response to questions, Mr. Himes stated the parking variance is
no longer needed and there will be only one apartment on the second
floor.
Discussion ensued regarding the city Traffic Engineering Department
comment that elimination of any required parking increases the
traff ic congestion on Clearwater Beach. This was not considered to
be a problem due to the proposed use.
Discussion ensued with regard to the applicant also owning the
restaurant next door to the subject property. Concern was
expressed the two properties would be used as one common area with
customers driving from one to the other.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Homer
moved to grant variances #1, #3, #4 and #5 because the applicant
has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed
in section 137.012(d) of the Land Development Code subject to the
following conditions: 1) The variance is based on the application
for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including
maps, site plan dated August 11, 1992, surveys and other documents
submitted in support of the applicant's request for a variance.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of
the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with
regard to the site or any physical structure located on the site,
will result in this variance being null and of no effectj 2) There
shall be only two uses provided on this site, one dwelling unit
which shall comprise the entire second floor and a retail store
containing 1616.79 sq. ft. which shall comprise the first floorj 3)
The clear space that is provided shall be "obstructed" by only
parking and sidewalk access on the east side and only parking on
the west side; no other structures shall be erected in these areas;
4) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall sub-
mit a landscaping plan to the Environmental Management Group to
insure that selected landscaping materials be as dense as possible
to maximize front yard landscaping; 5) The requisite building
permit shall be obtained within 6 months from the date of this
public hearing and 6) That concrete car stops shall be installed in
all parking spaces. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote
being taken, Messrs. Homer, Plisko, Gans and Johnson voted "ayel';
Ms. Whitney voted "nay". Motion carried. ReqUest granted.
DCAB
2
10/08/92
variance #2 was withdrawn.
Item B - (continued trom 9/24/92) Louis J and Mary R
D'Amico for variances of (1) 90 ft to permit minimum lot
width of GO ft; (2) 3.30 ft to permit a second story
building addition 8.70 ft from side property line; and
(3) 5 ft to permit an inground pool 5 ft from side
property line at 410 Hamden Dr, Columbia Sub No 4, Lot
10, Zoned CR 28 (resort commercial). V 92-49
Planning Manager Shuford stated this application was continued from
the meeting of September 10, 1992, at the request of the applicant.
He explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes
to construct a swimming pool and a second story addition to an
existing duplex on a substandard lot.
Discussion ensued regarding courtesy review approval by the
Development Review committee (DRC) and it was felt these reviews
should be done by the Zoning Section and the Building Division of
the Planning and Development Department.
Gregory Fox, representing the applicant, stated the owner wishes to
increase the size of his apartment and add a pool in the courtyard
of the GO-foot-wide lot. He stated there is no intent to increase
the number of units from the four that currently exist. Mr. Fox
indicated the addition will be placed directly over the first floor
and will have an inside staircase. He said the applicant agrees
with staff's conditions.
~_, In response to questions, Mr. Fox stated the proposed addition will
add 1,000 square feet of space to the existing 500-square-foot
apartment and the building has seven parking spaces with one space
being used for a dumpster location.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposal. It was questioned
whether or not the addition exceeds the FEMA 50 percent rule. Mr.
Fox indicated the construction costs have not been calculated;
however, the size of the addition could be scaled down if neces-
sary.
A suggestion was made to change the proposed dumpster location and
provide an enclosure for aesthetics.
One letter was submitted in support of the application.
Concern was expressed enlarging owners' units is becoming a trend,
creating the possibility the additions could be converted to rental
units in the future.
It was felt the presence of the owner on the premises is desirable
and a swimming pool is essential to the operation of a motel.
"'--~
DCAB
3
10/08/92
"""- .~.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans
moved to gran~ 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; the
particular physical surroundings and shape 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 are the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship
created by the lot size subject to the conditions: 1) The variance
is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted
by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys and other docu-
ments submitted in support of the applicant's request for a vari-
ance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in
support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done
with regard to the site or any physical structure located on the
site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2)
This site is limited to four motel-apartment units. There shall be
no additional motel or apartment units constructed; 3) Plant
material shall meet the minimum requirements of Sec. 136.023 of the
Land Development Code; 4) To ensure the second floor is not
converted into additional units the applicant shall apply to the
Zoning section and Building Division of the Planning & Development
Department for courtesy review approval prior to the formal
application for a building permit; 5) Access to the second floor
shall be exclusively through an interior staircase from the owner's
lower unit. No exterior access to the second floor shall be
permi tted. Building plans showing the access shall be ,required for
courtesy review by the Zoning section and Building Division of the
Planning & Development Department; 6) The applicant shall reconfig-
ure the plan to include a dumpster enclosure; 7) The variance will
be void if the subject apartment is ever subdivided; B) The addi-
tion shall conform to all FEMA rules and regulations; and 9) A
building permit shall be obtained within 6 months from the date of
this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the
vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Pliska, Gans and Johnson
voted "aye"; Mr. Homer was not present at this time. Motion
carried. Request granted.
1. Robert L and Janet M Schueszler for variances of (1)
6.5 ft to permit a lot width of 63.5 it where 70 ft is
required; and (2) 15 ft to allow a garage addition 10 ft
from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 1440
Rogers St, Breeze Hill, Blk A, Lot 11, zoned RS 8 (Single
Family Residential). V 92-52
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail
stating the applicant wishes to construct an attached garage. The
applicant is proposing to remove an existing metal shed located in
DCAB
4
10/08/92
the northeast corner of the rear yard. The property was platted in
,t::." 1925 and qualifies as a legitimate nonconforming lot.
Art Shand, representing the applicant, said there has been no
opposition from the neighbors, the owner is preparing for retire-
ment and would like to use part of the proposed garage for a
workshop.
Concern was expressed regarding a 42-foot deep garage as 24 feet
was considered to be standard.
Questions were raised regarding the proposed use of the existing
garage. Mr. Shand thought it would be used as auxiliary space,
possibly a family or living room.
Concern was expressed there was no hardship shown.
....-..~. .
f.Ir. Homer moved to cont.inue this case to the meeting of Octo-
ber 22, 1992. The mot.ion was duly seconded and carried unani-
mously.
2. William A Day, Trustee (East Shore Motel/Apts) for
variances of (1) 6.5 ft to permit a building 3.5 ft from
street right-of-way where 10 ft is required; (2) 21.5 ft
to permit stairs 2.5 ft and a building and a second floor
addition 6 ft from side (south) property line where 24 ft
is required; and (3) 15.6 ft to permit a building
addition 9.4 ft from Clearwater Harbor at 473 E Shore Dr,
Clwr Beach Park First Add, Blk C, Lots 6 and 7, zoned CB
(Beach commercial). V 92-53
Mr. Pliska declared a conflict of interest with regard to this
case.
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail
stating the applicant wishes to construct a one-story utility
building and a second floor addition to an existing building on a
non-conforming property. The utility building will have a
handicapped restroom, laundry facility and will house the mainte-
nance and pool equipment. It was recommended to enclose or screen
an existing dumpster located in front of the property.
William Day, owner and applicant, stated the subject property is
his retirement home. He said the roof structure of the existing
building has termite damage and will be replaced with the second
floor addition and a new roof added to match those in the area. He
feels the proposed improvements will make the area more attractive.
Mr. Day indicated the facility has no other storage, the utility
building will not impact the waterf~ont view and the application
has been approved by the flood board.
DCAB
5
10/08/92
In response to questions, Mr. Day stated an existing kitchen area
~~~ downstairs is very small. He said the submitted drawing does not
accurately depict the parking layout and at least 11 parking spaces
will be provided.
-....""...
Discussion ensued regarding parking requirements and dumpster
location. Mr. Day indicated he is working with the city Sanitation
Department and may provide landscaping in lieu of a dumpster
enclosure he is proposing to relandscape the grounds. It was noted
the submitted plans have the adjacent neighbors' approval.
Discussion ensued regarding the style and materials for the
proposed additions. It was felt they should have a similar
appearance to others in the area. Mr. Day indicated he wishes to
use glass to create an open effect.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans
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 lot size and the needed improvements such as
screening the pool, subject to the conditions: 1) The variance is
based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by
the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys and other documents
submitted in support of the applicant's request for a variance.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of
the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with
regard to the site or any physical structure located on the site,
will result in thHi vari,ance being null and of no effect; 2) The
applicant shall reconfigure the plan to include a dumpster
enclosure; 3) The requisite building permit shall be obtained
within six months from the date of this public hearing; and (4) The
exterior of the utility buildinq shall conform to the architectural
theme of the motel. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote
being taken, Ms. whitney, Messrs. Homer, Gans and Johnson voted
"aye"; Mr. Pliska abstained. Motion carried. Rec:ruest granted.
3. Ann K Burchenal for a variance to permit construction
of a deck and walkover seaward of the coastal construc-
tion control line (CCCL) at 1058 Eldorado Ave, Mandalay
Sub, Blk 70, Lot 4 and part of Lot 3, zoned RS 8 (Single
Family Residential) and OS/R (Open Space/Recreation).
V 92-54
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail
stating the applicant wishes to construct a walk-over deck seaward
of the CCCL. He stated the applicant previously obtained a permit
DCAB
6
10/08/92
i/fJ.\"
, .1 ~\
,,^,
from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for a walk-over
structure; however, the permit expired in June, 1992.
Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, stated beach
accretion over the last 30 years has created a significant dune
system on the subject property which creates a hardship for the
applicant. He indicated construction of the original walk-over was
complicated by the turtle nesting season and the permit expired.
He requested standard condition #1 be modified to allow for the
possibility of the DNR dictating relocation of the proposed walk-
over.
In response to questions, Mr. Cline indicated structures of this
type are becoming common in other parts of the state and he hopes
the city may consider administrative approval in the future. He
said the proposed location can be moved back slightly, if neces-
sary. He was not sure if Flood Board approval would be necessary.
Discussion ensued regarding the location of the proposed structure
and the property boundaries. It was indicated the seawall
essentially marks the rear property line.
Discussion ensued in regard to riparian rights. Mr. Cline
indicated there are no title rights to accreted land; they accrete
naturally to the owner.
Discussion ensued in regard to locating structures seaward of the
seawall and not the CCCL so to avoid setting a precedent.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans
moved to grant a variance to permit the construction of a structure
seaward of the retaining wall/seawall 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 variance arises from a condition which is unique to
the property and not caused by the owner or applicant; the
particular topographical conditions of the property and preserva-
tion of the environment makes the variance a necessity and the
variance is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship subject
to the following conditions: 1) The variance is based on the
application for a variance and documents submitted by the appli-
cant, including maps, plans, surveys and other documents submitted
in support of the applicant's request for a variance. Deviation,
except those required by the Department of Natural Resources, from
any of the above documents submitted in support of the request for
a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or
any physical structure located on the site, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect; 2) The requisite building
permit shall be obtained within 6 months from the date of this
public hearing; 3) The applicant shall obtain all the necessary
DCAB
7
10/08/92
~., permits from other applicable state and city review agencies and
f H c, boards prior to the construction of the structure and 4) the
structure shall not exceed 4 feet 3 inches in width. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Request qranted.
4. Adriano Battaglini (Andy's Sports Car Center) for a
variance to permit concrete washout parking lot surface
rather than a graded paving surface for parking lot at
500 N Ft Harrison Ave, O. Harrington'S Sub, Lots 1 and 2,
zoned CG (General Commercial) and RM 28 (Multiple Family
Residential). V 92-55
Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail
stating the applicant wishes his parking lot surface to remain as
it currently exists, as Uconcrete wash", or scrap from a concrete
load. Meeting conditional use conditions for approval was
determined to be necessary in order for the establishment to be in
harmony with surrounding properties and to avoid creating a
nuisance situation for the city in general.
The city Transportation and Engineering Divisions recommend a
parking lot for this type of usage be paved in accordance with City
standards. Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD)
standards for run-off water quality must be met due to the nature
of the business and the proximity to the Gulf of Mexico.
Grace Mandicott, representing the applicant, stated much time,
money and effort have been devoted to aesthetically improving the
lot and bringing it into conformance with the Code. She indicated
there have been many problems associated with trying to start the
business and sufficient resources have not been available to pave
the lot.
While the applicants were commended for their efforts to improve
the property, concern was expressed sufficient hardship has not
been demonstrated to justify granting the variance.
Discussion ensued with regard to the application. It was ques-
tioned whether or not payment in lieu of on-site water retention
would be acceptable and if paving only the driveways would satisfy
the requirement. Planning Manager Shuford related information from
the various boards and agencies involved, indicating paving the
entire lot is recommended.
A citizen spoke in opposition to the application indicating the
subject property is in violation of a number of code requirements
and is being used to store inoperable vehicles with derelicts
sleeping in them. She feels the subject property is an eyesore.
\
............,;
DCAB
8
10/08/92
,fp". ~
....--.
,
\....,../
Discussion ensued regarding the subject property. It was indicated
one of the requirements for approval at a 1990 Planning and Zoning
Board hearing for the property was that paving the lot or obtaining
a variance was necessary.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans
moved to deny the variance 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; no unneces-
sary hardship was shown; the variance is not the minimum; the
request for the variance is based primarily upon the desire of the
applicant to prevent a greater financial investment in the
property; the granting of the variance would be materially
detrimental or injurious to other property in the neighborhood and
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.
II. Approval of Minutes of September 10 and september 24, 1992
Mr. Homer moved to approve the minutes of September 10 and
September 24, 1992, in accordance with copies submitted to each
board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
III. Board and staff Discussion
Mr. Shuford invited the Board to attend an appointed official
conference to be held at the st. Petersburg Airport on October
23, 1992. He stated the program includes a review of legal proce-
dures, presentations regarding environmental and land management,
the state comprehensive planning act and zoning and site plan
review ground rules. He stated the deadline for registration is
October 15, 1992 and asked members to inform him of their interest
as soon as possible.
Discussion ensued regarding the nighttime installation of telephone
booths in residential neighborhoods. It was noted these are not
GTE installations. It was felt this could be a scam to overcharge
callers and staff was requested to investigate.
Concern was expressed regarding an inappropriate towel display at
the Surfin' USA retail store on Mandalay Avenue. Mr. Shuford
stated the display of products in store windows is not regulated.
Staff will investigate.
A quest~on was raised regarding the display of cards, gifts and
shirts ~n a street right-of-way on Clearwater Beach. It was
indicated this is not allowed by Code.
DCAB
9
10/08/92
(.",
( "
-..../
\........'
Concern was expressed regarding the patio at Fritz's Market having
tables and chairs and being covered by a canopy. Staff will'
investigate whether or not approval has b~en obtained for the
outdoor seating.
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 4:17 p.m.
ATTEST:
.j
DCAB
10
10/08/92
!~"., ,,' ",~t,~ '" :~,' (,_ '::, I',': j'.: I.;,' '1, . :'_. .', " '.:' , ,'.~ ' f.": " . ,'~ "~," ',' I 'j',' .i-' I I.
FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
I.ASl NAft:';~ 1:;:~~U1"A Lt X' NAME CA' cgNCIL. COMMISSION, AU I 1I01Ul'Y, Oil. CO ,,","I t11 f,t
MAlI,lNG ^nDIl.I,~s 1111< 1I0A\{J), COUl''il'll., COMMIS!.ION. AUT 1I01l.1 IY Oil. COMMl 1'11,[ ON
Wlllelll SEll. VE IS A lJNIT OF
('11Y
70{p 0 A/~ ,4.1!
C. i-er<.WATErL
COlJ/'oH'
P r jt/ E:. LLIIJ';?
)7\. C1lY
o COUNl Y
o OlliE\{ I.OCAI. Am:Nn
";,\MI: OF 1'01.11 ICAI. SUllIlIVI!.ION:
c;. / 1Y t7r ? Lt;{1t!lW /<J rE f'L
I>ATE ON WIII('II VOl" OCCUKIl UJ
MV l'osmON IS;
o n,[f:tI\'E
AI'I'Ol";!IVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected bourd,
council, commission, authorit),. or commiltcc. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who arc presented
with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.31.13, Florida Statutcs,
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in whieh you have a cannier of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether >'ou hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form
before complcting the reverse side and filing the form.
......'~..
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or olher 10(:'11 public office MUST ABSTAIN from vOling on n measure
which inures to his special private gain, Eaeh elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a me,lsure
which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained (including the parent
organiwtion or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he is retained); to the special privlIte g:dn of a relativc; or to thc special
private gain of a business associate, Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies undcr Sec. 1 63.35r, or 163.357. F,S., and
officers of independent special lax districts elc:ctcd on n one-acre, one-vote basis arc not prohibileu from voting in that capacity,
For purposes or this law. a "relativc" includes ollly the orricer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband. wife. father-in-Iuw, mother-in-
law. sOIl-in-taw, llnd daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partncr, joim venturer. eoo.....ner of properly, or corporate shareholder (.....herc the shares of the
corporation arc not listed on any national or n:giona I stock exchange).
EI.ECTED OFFICEHS:
In addirion to abstaining from VOlin/;; in the situations described above. you must disclose the con!1icl:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly staling to the asscmbly lhe nature of your intcrest in the measure on
.....hich you me absulining from vOling: and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTEI~ THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with tht: person responsible for
recording the minutes of thc nleeling, .....ho should in~orporate lhe form in lhe minules.
'-,
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you musl abstain from vOling in the !>itllations de~cribcJ ahove. you otherwise may participate in these mailers. However,
you must disclose the n;llure of the conflict bcfore making an)' attempl to inOucnce the decision, whether orally or in writing and
whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEto.' 0 TO MAKE ANY ATrEMPT TO INFLUENCE TilE DECISION PRIOR TO THE I...IEETING AT WHICIJ
THE VOTE \\'LI. BE TAKEN:
. YOll musl complele and file lhis form {before making any UllerTlpt to innucnce the decbion) with the persall responsible for
recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes.
. ^ copy of the form mllst he pwvided immediately \0 the other memher!'. of thc agcm:y,
. The form must be read publicly ill the ne.\l lllcetill!! after .he form is filcd.
cr FOR.... ~H. 10.'11
l',\liE 1
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE TItE DECiSION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
. You must disclose orally Ihe nalure of your conflict in the measure before participating.
· You musl complele the form and filc il wilhin 15 days after Ihe \'ote occurs with 111c person responsible for recording the minul';-'"
the m~'Clil1g, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of lhe form mwa he provided immediately 10 the (l, '
members of the agency, and the form musl be read publicly nt the nexl meeting arrer lhe form is filed.
I,
AL.E X
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
PL I ~ ~ 0 10 -:' 0....
l- ' hereby disclose thnt on - ~
, 19 1'2.:
(a) ^ meaSllre ~lme or will come before my agency whieh (check one)
A- inured to my specinl pri\'ate gain:
_ inured to the special gain of my business associate,
_ inured to the special gain of my rclnti\'c.
_ inured to lhe spccinl gain of
whom lam rctained; or
_ inured to lhe special gain of
is lhe parenl orgnni71ltion or subsidiary of n principal which has rctained me,
(b) The mensure before my agency Ilnd the nalure of my connicting interest in the measure is as follows:
, by
, which
/ 1C:Jvt -W- "Z-
Or
IC)~B - Cjl
~ rLI1I.J0
.J- A M nJ"G
p/Z. {).j 6 t..--j
(;jf2.C)11 -;r3c..'r
177G
f;t. 0{0 '7tsl?
~i/J'l-
(/IQ 11../ IOJVt~S/
fitQ L1 1 fL61fi;{P
~..
It) - ~ -'1 L-
Date Filed
iZr 9~
Signature
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES S112.317 (1991). A FAILUI~E TO MAKE ANY REQt: D
DISCLO~.URE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF TilE FOLLO\~eG:
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROf\1 OFFICE OR EMPI.OYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN
SALAR y, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENAI.TY NOT TO EXCEED S5,lXlO,
CE FORM htl. 11),"'1
. .... .'. . . '.' . fl. .... p' , r ' .."., J":. ~ ~ . '. -I I. . .
f"r~
~...'
ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, October 8, 1992 - 1:00 p.m. - commission Meeting Room,
city Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Florida
To consider requests for variances of the Land Development Code:
I.
Public Hearings
Item A (oontinued from
9/10/92) Valentino Koumoulidis
to reconsider previous request
for variances of (1) 83 ft to
permit a 67 ft wide lot; (2) 3
parking spaces to permit 6 spac-
es; (3) 24.85% f,:,ont yard open
space to allow 2~'.15%; (4) 3.5
ft to permit 1.5 ft of perimeter
landscape buffering; and (5)
12.8 ft to permit zero ft of
clear space at 606 Bayway Blvd,
Bayside Sub No 5, Blk A, Lot 7,
zoned CR 28 (resort commercial) .
V 91-25
DCAB
I.
Public Hearings
Item A - Granted variances #1,
#3, #4 and #5 subject to the
following conditions: 1) The
variance is based on the appli-
cation for a variance and docu-
ments submitted by the appli-
cant, including maps, site plan
dated August 11, 1992, surveys
and other documents submitted in
support of the applicant's
request for a variance. Devia-
tion from any of the above
documents submitted in support
of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done
with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on
the site, will result in this
variance being null and of no
effect; 2) There shall be only
two uses provided ,on this site,
one dwelling unit which shall
comprise the entire second floor
and a retail store containing
1616.79 sq.ft. which shall
comprise the first floor; 3) The
clear space that is provided
shall be "obstructed" by only
parking and sidewalk access on
the east,side and only parking
on the west side; no other
structures shall be erected in
these areas; 4) Prior to issu-
ance of a building permit, the
applicant shall submit a
landscaping plan to the
Environmental Management Group
to insure that selected lands-
caping materials be as dense as
possible to maximize front yard
landscaping; 5) The requisite
1
10/08/92
(~"'.
'---...~
Item B (continued from
9/24/92) Louis J and Mary R
D'Amico for variances of (1) 90
ft to permit minimum lot width
of 60 ft; (2) 3.30 ft to permit
a second story building addition
8.70 ft from side property line;
and (3) 5 ft to permit an
inground pool 5 ft from side
property line at 410 Harnden Dr,
Columbia Sub No 4, Lot 10, Zoned
CR 28 (resort commercial). V
92-49
DCAB
building permit shall be
obtained within 6 months from
the date of this pUblic hearing
and 6) That concrete car stops
shall be installed in all
parking spaces.
Variance /2 withdrawn.
Item B - Granted subject to the
following conditions: 1) The
variance is based on the appli-
cation for a variance and docu-
ments submitted by the appli-
cant, including maps, plans,
surveys and other documents
submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a vari-
ance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in
support of the request for a
variance regarding the work to
be done with regard to the site
or any physical structure locat-
ed on the site, will result in
this variance being null and of
no effect; 2) This site is
limited to four motel-apartment
units. There shall be no
addi tional motel or apartment
units constructed; 3) Plant
material shall meet the minimum
requirements of Sec. 136.023 of
the Land Development Code; 4} To
ensure the second floor is not
converted into additional units
the applicant shall apply to the
Zoning section and Building
Division of the Planning &
Development Department for
courtesy review approval prior
to the formal application for a
building permit; 5) Access to
the second floor shall be
exclusively through an interior
staircase from the owner's lower
unit. No exterior access to the
second floor shall be permitted.
Building plans showing the
access shall be required for
review by the Zoning section and
Building Division of the Plan-
ning & Development Department
2
10/08/92
~"
v""1
'\...'
~...........
1. Robert L and Janet M Schues-
zler for variances of (1) 6.5 ft
to permit a lot width of 63.5 ft
where 70 ft is required; and (2)
15 ft to allow a garage addition
10 ft from street right-of-way
where 25 ft is required at 1440
Rogers st, Breeze Hill, Blk A,
Lot 11, zoned RS 8 (single Fami-
ly Residential). V 92-52
2. William A Day, Trustee (East
Shore Motel/Apts) for variances
of (1) 6.5 ft to permit a build-
ing 3.5 ft from street right-of-
way where 10 ft is required; (2)
21.5 ft to permit stairs 2.5 ft
and a building and a second
f loor addition 6 ft from side
(south) property line where 24
ft is required; and (3) 15.6 ft
to permit a building addition
9.4 ft from Clearwater Harbor at
473 E Shore Dr, Clwr Beach Park
First Add, Blk C, Lots 6 and 7,
zoned CB (Beach commercial).
V 92-53
DCAB
for courtesy review; 6) The
applicant shall reconfigure the
plan to include a dumpster
enclosure; 7) The variance will
be void if the subject apartment
is ever subdivided; 8) The addi-
tion shall conform to all FEMA
rules and regulations; and 9) A
building permit shall be
obtained within 6 months from
the date of this public hearing.
1.
contined to 10/22/92.
2. Granted subject to the fol-
lowing conditions: 1) The vari-
ance is based on the application
for a variance and documents
submi tted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys
and other documents submitted in
suport of the applicant's
request for a variance. Devia-
tion from any of the above
documents subn.i tted in support
of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done
with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on
the site, will result in this
variance being null and of no
effect; 2) The applicant shall
reconfigure the plan to include
a dumpster enclosure; 3) The
requisite building permit shall
be obtained within six months
from the date of this public
hearing; and (4) The exterior of
the utility buildinq shall
conform to the architectural
theme of the motel.
3
10/08/92
,,~
~--'
3. Ann K Burchenal for a vari-
ance to permit construction of a
deck and walkover seaward of the
coastal construction control
line (C.C.C.L.) at 1058 Eldorado
Ave, Manda1ay Sub, Blk 70, Lot 4
and part of Lot 3, zoned RS 8
(single Family Residential) and
OS/R (Open Space/Recreation).
V 92-54
3. Granted variance to permit
construction of a structure sea-
ward of the retaining seawall
subject to the fOllowing condi-
tions: 1) The variance is based
on the application for a vari-
ance and documents submitted by
the applicant, including maps,
plans, surveys and other docume-
nts submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a vari-
ance. Deviation, except those
required by the Department of
Natural Resources, from any of
the above documents submitted in
support of the request for a
variance regarding the work to
be done with regard to the site
or any physical structure locat-
ed on the site, will result in
this variance being null and of
no effect; 2) The requisite
building permit shall be
obtained within 6 months from
the date of this public hearing;
3) The applicant shall obtain
all the necessary permits from
other applicable state and city
review agencies and boards prior
to the construction of the deck;
and (5) the structure shall not
exceed 4 feet 3 inches in width.
4. Adriano Battaglini (Andy's
Sports Car Center) for a vari-
ance to permit concrete washout
parking lot surface rather than
a graded paving surface for par-
king lot at 500 N Ft Harrison
Ave, O. Harrington's Sub, Lots 1
and 2, zoned CG (General Commer-
cial) and RM 28 (Multiple Family
Residential). V 92-55
II. Approval of Minutes of
September 10, and September
24, 1992
III. Board and Staff Discussion III.
4. Denied.
II. Approved as submitted.
IV. Adjournment
IV. 4:22 p.m.
DCAB
10/08/92
4