The URL can be used to link to this page

01/28/1993 (2) DATE' ~/ DCAB DEVELOJ:'MENT CODE AD-JU5TMENT BOARD () f /.J..? / 9. ? , .- --- / u c:2~ ,'J IF .. "".~'..'I'~.'" ~.I: ':\, '~.' . ."'..~I." '. ..>' ,,', .' I ...,..~.".. .......... ,1 ,I ' f': :, r . ........T.'n-~ "-.- ACTION AGENDA DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD Thursday, January 28, 1993 - 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 - (continued from 12/10/93 & 1/14/93) George E and Mary Jane Collins to permit a motor home to be parked within setback area from a street right-of-way at 1944 Ripon OT; Fair Oaks 1st Add, Lot 23, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residdntial). V 92-63 Action: continued to the meeting of February 11, 1993. Item B - (continued from 12/10/92) Brian G Salisbury for variances of (1) 1.37 ft to allow a minimum lot width of 58.63 ft where 60 ft is required; (2) 2 ft to allow a landscaped buffer 3 ft in width where 5 ft is required (east property line); and (3) 5 ft to allow zero landscape buffer where 5 ft is required (west property line) at 505 Druid Rd, Sec 16-29- lS, M&B 44.01, 44.011, and vacated street, zoned OL (Limited Office). V 92-65 Action: continued to the meeting of February 11, 1993. Item C - (continued from 12/10/92) Tom M sehlhorst (Tom Sehlhorst Inc) for variances of (1) 8.09 ft to allow building 1.91 ft from (west) side property line; (2) 14.51 ft to permit building 10.49 ft from a street right-of-way (spruce at); (3) 0.01 to permit floor area ratio of 0.31; (4) 1 percent building coverage to permit 31 percent building coverage; and (5) 12 parking spaces to permit 12 spaces in lieu of the 24 spaces required at 611 Palm Bluff at, Palm Bluff 1st Add, Lots 26, 28, and 30, zoned CN (Neighborhood commercial). V 92-67 Action: continued to the meeting of February 11, 1993. Item D - (continued from 1/14/93) Janusz and Roxana Nowicki (GUlf to Bay Pawn Inc) for a variance of 5 parking spaces to allow 18 spaces where 23 spaces are required at 2054 Gulf to Bay Blvd, See 13-29-15, M&B 13.06, zoned CG (General commer- cial). V 93-01 Action: continued to the meeting of February 25, 1993. DCAB 1 01/28/93 1 '. ......' Item E - (continued from 1/14/93) Bearstown Partners Ltd (Food Lion at Bearstown) for a variance of 257 parking spaces (including 1 handicap space) to allow 285 spaces where 542 spacas are required at 1219-1293 B Missouri Ave, F E Hanousek's BUb, part of Lots 11 and 12, zoned cc (commercial Center). V 93-03 Action: continued to the meeting of February 11, 1993. 1. Lonnie C and Ann B LeTourneau for variances, to permit addition of a boat lift and catwalk to an existing dock, which consist of (1) 7 ft to permit a dock 28 ft in width where 21 ft is allowed; (2) 8 ft to permit a dock 38 ft in length where 30 ft is allowed; and (3) 13 ft to permit a dock 7 ft from extended property line where 20 ft is required at 43 Leeward ISland, Island Estates of Clwr, Unit one, Lot 17, zoned RS B (Single Family Residential) and AL/C (Aquatic Lands/coastal). V 93-04 Action: Granted subject to the following conditions: ~) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, including maps, plans, surveys and other documents submitted in support of the applicants' 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 effect; 2) no tie poles shall be added along the southern property line and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. 2. carmelita Mosca Baccile (Alain Poul.in/Carmela's Manor ACLF) for a variance of 444.9 ft to allow a group care facility 55.1 ft from a single family zoning district where 500 ft is required at 2001 Harding st, skycrest Terrace, Blk C, Lot 1 and part of Lot 2, zoned RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-05 Action: Denied. 3. Thelma Shaw for variances of (1) 19 ft to permit a lot width of 51 ft where 70 ft is required; (2) 18 ft to permit a setback of 7 ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is re- quired at 1312-14 N Madison Ave, Fairmont Sub, Blk G, Lot 9, zoned RM 12 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-06 Action: Granted subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, including maps I plans, surveys and other documents submitted in support of the applicants' request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the DCAB 2 01/28/93 f~'\ '-. request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the sit~ or any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) all requisite building permits shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing. 4. Island Escape Condo for a variance of 6 ft to allow 18 ft of continuous clear space where 24 ft is required. This en- croachment would permit installation of a non-opaque aluminum rail fence 5 ft in height and 75 ft in length at 325 Island Way, ISland Escape Condo, zoned RM 20 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-07 Action: Granted subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, including maps, plans, surveys and other documents submitted in support of the applicants' 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 effect; 2) staff shall visit the site to confirm whether the trees planted on the south property line are in conformance with the city clear space requirements; 3) the pool equipment, if less than 30 inches in height, shall be screened; if more than 30 inches in height, shall be relocated outside the clear space; 4) the color, materials and six-inch picket spacing of this particular fence style indicated by the attachment in this application shall be used; 5) all requisite building permits shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. s. L.O.M~, Inc (Surf west Inc) for variances of (1) 3 percent to permit 48 percent building coverage where 45 percent maxi- mum is allowed; (2) 5 ft to permit a building setback of 10 ft from N Gulfviell Blvd where 15 ft is required; (3) 1.1.4 ft to permit a building setback of 3.6 ft from Papaya at where 15 ft is required; (4) 9.1 ft to permit a building setback of 6.4 ft from rear (north) property line where 15.5 ft is required; and (5) 6.5 ft to permit a building setback of 6 ft from side (east) property line where 12.5 ft is required at 24 Papaya at, clwr Beach Park on clwr Beach Island, Lots 29 thru 32, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 93-08 Action: Granted - variance #1 subject to the conditions: 1) the vari- ance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the app~icants, including maps, plans, surveys and other documents submitted 1.n support of the appli-cants' 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 effect and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. Denied - variances #2, #3, #4 and #5. DCAB 01/28/93 3 6. Decade properties, Inc for variances (1) of 10.2 ft to al- low a side setback of 19.8 ft where 30 ft is required; (2) of 28.2 ft to allow a stair tower and a 48 in hiqh non-opaque fence for pool, to encroach 19.8 ft into the required clear space of 48 ft; (3) to allow motel rooms in excess of 500 sq ft; and (4) 3 ft to allow a 2 ft wide landscape strip where 5 ft is required at 850 Bayway Blvd, Bayside Sub No 6, unit A, Blk 0, Lot 12 and unit C, Blk 0, Lots 13 thru 15, zoned eR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 93-09 Action: Granted variances #1 and #2 subject to the fOllowing condi- tions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, including maps, plans and the floor plans initialled and dated 1-28-93 by the applicant's representa- tive and submitted to the Planning Department at this hearing, surveys and other documents submitted in support of the appli-cants' 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 effect; 2) prior to the issuance of a building permit, a revised plan shall be submitted to in- clude the following: a) a tabulation table showing the Land Development Code requirements and the proposed site data for parking, perimeter and interior landscaping, screening, and handicap parking; b) redesign of the dock to meet the three concerns of the harbormaster and c) an accurate plan that reflects the existing and proposed conditions on the site; 3) no on-site fueling or liveaboards shall be permitted; 4) any additional commercial vessel activity (including but not limited to the number of vessels or an increase in the number of passengers served by those vessels) other than the existing Zenith Charter operation (at its current level of operation), shall require additional conditional use permit approval; 5) not more than 27 slips shall be permitted; no tie- ups shall be permitted on the easternmost side of the dock and this area shall be appropriately signed to prohibit boats from tying up to the dock in this area; 6) all transient vessels shall meet all city code requirements; 7) the applicant shall obtain an occupational license within one year of the date of this public hearing; 8) the applicant must submit site plans for the review process with regard to the proposed motel development; 9) the units shall not be sold as time- shares or condominium units; 10) these variances apply to the own- er/applicant only; 11) all of the conditions upon which this variance was, approved by the Planning and Zoning Board will likewise apply to the granting of this variance and 12) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing. Granted - variance #3 subject to the above conditions plus an addition to condition #9: the units shall not be subdivided or changed in size at any future time from the original plans submitted at this public hearing. Granted - variance #4 subject to the first 12 conditions and: variance shall apply only to the east side property line. this DCAB 4 01/28/93 (~'\ (""") ~u; ',-~" 7. Ginez Holding's, Inc (Ho Jo Inn) for a variance of 5 parking spaces to permit 10 new marina slips with zero addit.ional parking spaces provided at 656 Bayway Blvd, Bayside Sub No 5, Blk A, Lots 15 thru 20, and riparian rights, zoned CR 28 (Resort commercial) and AL/C (Aquatic LandS/Coastal). V 93-10 Action: Continued to the meeting of February 11, 1993. II. Board and Staff Discussion III. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman (continued from 1-14-93) Action: Continued to the meeting of March 4, 1993. IV. Adjournment Action: Adjourned at 5:46 p.m. DCAB 5 01/28/93 . '. . : . ' . '.. ~ , I , _~. ." '1 . "..' ".' '.' '. - :. ..... . ".. ~ : ~ '.' '", .' I ' +/ " ',' . ~ ' . ~ ,'~ oj ~ DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD January 28, 1993 Members present: Alex Pliska, chairman Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chairman otto Gans John W. Homer John B. Johnson .,.............~ Also present: Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney Scott Shuford, Planning Manager Ted Clarke, Planner II Susan Stephenson, Deputy city Clerk Mary K. Diana, Assistant city Clerk Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II 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 12/10/93 , 1/14/93) George E and Mary Jane collins to permit a motor home to be parked within setback area from a street right-of-way at 1944 Ripon Dr, Fair Oaks 1st Add, Lot 23, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 92-63 It was noted this item has passed the 45-day limit and must be readvertised. Mr. Homer moved to continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1993 to allow time to readvertise. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Item B - (continued from 12/10/92) Brian G Salisbury for variances of (1) 1.37 ft to allow a minimum lot width of 58.63 ft where 60 ft is required; (2) 2 ft to allow a landscaped buffer 3 ft in width where 5 ft is required (east property line); and (3) 5 ft to allow zero land- scape buffer where 5 ft is required (west property line) at 505 Druid Rd, Sec 16-29-15, M&B 44.01, 44.011, and vacated street. zoned OL (Limited Office). V 92-65 i I """. DCAB Minutes 1 01/28/93 - . , , \.......< ...........,1 This application was continued previously in order to obtain a site plan. No site plan has been received. Mr. Homer moved to continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1993 to allow time to receive the requested site plan and for readvertisement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Item C - (continued from 12/10/92) Tom M sehlhorst (Tom Sehlhorst Inc) for variances of (1) 8.09 ft to allow building 1.91 ft from (west) side property line; (2) 14.51 ft to permit building 10.49 ft from a street right- of-way (Spruce st); (3) 0.01 to permit floor area ratio of 0.31; (4) 1 percent building coverage to permit 31 percent building coverage; and (5) 12 parking spaces to permit 12 spaces in lieu of the 24 spaces required at 611 Palm Bluff at, Palm Bluff 1st Addl Lots 26l 28, and 3D, zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial). V 92-67 It was noted this item has passed the 45-day limit and must be readvertised. Mr. Homer moved to continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1993 to allow time to readvertise.. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Item D - (continued from 1/14/93) Janusz and Roxana Nowicki (Gulf to Bay Pawn .Inc) for a variance of 5 parking spaces to allow 18 spaces where 23 spac~s are required at 2054 Gulf to Bay Blvd, Sec 13-29-15, M&B 13.06l zoned CG (General commercial). V 93-01 The applicant was offered the opportunity to request a continuance to meet with the City Planning and Development Department to discuss a suggested revision of the application. It was noted readvertisement will be necessary if a continuance is requested. Roxana Nowicki, owner/applicant, requested this item be continued. Mr. Homer moved to continue this application to the meeting of February 25, 1993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Item E - (continued from 1/14/93) Searstown Partners Ltd (Food Lion at Searstown) for a variance of 257 parking spaces (including 1 handicap space) to allow 285 spaces where 542 spaces are required at 1219-1293 S Missouri Ave, F E Hanousek's Sub, part of Lots 11 and 12l zoned CC (Commercial center). V 93-03 It was noted this application was revised and requires continuance for readvertisernent. DCAB Minutes 2 01/28/93 ~... "~/"'" ,..,..... ':," ,'.' . . ". '.' .' . . ...._.. J'.~ . , ' I' .' I ~". . ~,' .1, I ",f I" .' ",' j. . ~ .....0 ~ Mr. Homer moved to continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1993 to allow time to advertise the revised application. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 1. Lonnie C and Ann B LeTourneau for variances, to permit addition of a boat lift and catwalk to an existing dock, which consist of (1) 7 ft to permit a dock 28 ft in width where 21 ft is allowed; (2) B ft to permit a dock 38 ft in length where 30 ft is allowed; and (3) 13 ft to permit a dock 7 ft from extended property line where 20 ft is required at 43 Leeward Island, Island Estates of Clwr, unit One, Lot 17, zoned RS 8 (single Family Residential) and AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal). V 93-04 Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to add a 10,000 pound capacity boat lift and catwalk to an existing dock on an irregularly-shaped lot. There are no objections from the City Harbormaster or from adjacent property owners. steve Brunner, representing the applicant, responded to questions, stating the waterfront property owners on both sides of the subject property have signed off on the application. He indicated the proposed addition is necessary as the owner has purchased a larger boat. He stated two existing davits are proposed to remain on the seawall and expressed no objection to a condition prohibiting the installation of tie poles. ( 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 subject to the conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the appli- canto, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) no tie poles shall be added along the southern property line and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. 2. carmeli ta Mosca Baccile (Alain poulin/carmela's Manor ACLF) for a variance of 444.9 ft to allow a group care facility 55.1 ft from a single family zoning district where 500 ft is required at 2001 Harding st, Skycrest Terrace, Blk C, Lot 1 and part of J..ot 2, zoned RM B (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-05 ........- DCAB Minutes 3 01/28/93 ,... '1 <.........' Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to expand an existing six-bed family care facility (ACLF) to a Levell, nine-bed group care facility. It was reported no unique conditions exist on the site, there is no apparent hardship and the surrounding property is all residential. The City Traffic Engineering Department stated the proposed expansion would require additional parking spaces and payment of transportation impact fees. Paul Probst, attorney representing the applicant, presented and explained photographs and drawings in support of the application. He stated the applicant proposes to convert an existing three- bedroom rental unit on the premises into additional space for the ACLF, as having a nearby rental apartment is not conducive to the operation of the care facility. Mr. Probst said there will be no additions or structural changes to the building and felt converting three bedrooms from rental to ACLF does not represent a change, as both are residential uses. He indicated the request is minimal and is not being requested for financial gain, but for a lateral change in the type of tenancy. He said the proposal would not increase parking requirements or traffic impact in the area. In response to questions, Mr. Probst stated the facility meets HRS requirements and the rental unit contains a kitchenette area which will remain after the conversion. The tenancy has been month-to month and seasonal. It was pointed out that the conversion to full-time occupancy represents a financial gain and certain parking spaces currently in use are not legally recognized. Carl Poulin, administrator of the facility, spoke in support of the application. He responded to questions regarding the cost of resident care. One letter was submitted in support of the application. Four letters attesting to the cleanliness and quality of the establish- ment were submitted for the record. Concern was expressed the proposed change increases density and encroaches into the surrounding residential area. 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 granting of the variance would diminish or impair the value of surrounding property 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 upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Homer, Gans and Johnson voted "ayell; Mr. Plisko voted "nayll. Motion carried. DCAB Minutes 4 01/28/93 " I. .,'. .' ", .,!".~ ,", ;,". :,. ~'. ~1 " ',' .... ' . , ,li' .'.1 4. ,. ...: . " " t 3. Thelma Shaw for variances of (1) 19 ft to permit a lot width of 51 ft where 70 ft is required; (2) 18 ft to permit a setback of 7 ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 1312-14 N Madison Ave, Fairmont Sub, Blk G, Lot 9, zoned RM 12 (Multiple Family Residential) . V 93-06 Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the request will permit the construction of a single-family residence as part of the partnership of Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services (CNHS), the Challenge 2000 Infill Housing program and the city of Clearwater to build affordable housing in the North Greenwood area. The subject property was platted in 1924 and, while non-conforming with regard to width and street setback requirements, is considered to be a standard lot for the area. This is not an unusual request for the area. Jerry Spilatro, Assistant Executive Director of CNHS, representing the applicant, stated this program assists low- to moderate-income families become homeowners in clearwater. He said the homes meet Code and it is difficult to find suitable lots on which to build. He hopes to build 20 to 25 more homes this year. In response to a question, Mr. spilatro stated CNHS is a non-profit agency and this program receives federal funding. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson 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 subject to the conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) all requisite building permits shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unani- mously. 4. Island Escape Condo for a variance of 6 ft to allow 18 ft of continuous clear space where 24 ft is required. This encroachment would permit installation of a non- opaque aluminum rail fence 5 ft in height and 75 ft in length at 325 Island Way, Island Escape Condo, zoned RM 20 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-07 Planning Manager Shuford explained the application in detail stating the applicant is required by their insurance company to provide a 48-inch fence around the pool of an existing 10-unit ''-"' DCAB Minutes 5 01/28/93 p~.~ [ " .....,. , ~' condominium. The proposed fence will encroach six feet into the clear space and increase to five feet in height as the ground slope descends toward the dr.ainage/retention area. Jill Josapak, resident representing the Island Escape Condominium Association, stated the proposed fence will not block any view and will be aesthetically pleasing. The fence will also enclose a rock waterfall, landscaping, lights and pool equipment. Concern was expressed a small child could crawl through the six- inch spacing between slats. It was indicated the proposed fence meets the Code and insurance company standards. One citizen, representing the adjacent property owner to the south, spoke in opposition to the application. He feels the applicant's pool equipment is unsightly and he objects to a line of trees on the subject property blocking his view. He requested the granting of this variance be conditioned upon the applicant screening the pool equipment and removing approximately 20 trees. Discussion ensued regarding pool equipment height standards. A continuance was suggested to allow time to investigate the tree height and possible relocation of the pool equipment. Ms. Josapak expressed concern these suggestions would delay obtaining the needed insurance and be cost prohibitive for the association. She explained the association is trying to make the best use of pre-existing conditions and felt it would be a hardship to go to such extensive measures. Discussion ensued regarding satisfying the insurance requirements as soon as possible and investigating bringing the property into compliance. Seeking variances to tree and pool equipment height was suggested; however, it was felt this would not be viewed favorably because clear space is a sensitive issue. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. whitney moved to grant the variance 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 variance arises from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused by the owner or applicant and the variance is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship created by the requirement of the insurance company to enclose the pool, subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) staff shall visit the site to confirm whether the trees planted on the DCAB Minutes 6 01/28/93 , I ',. ' 0/ '. ,,' '" . ~ ". ' f, ~ " " " .. " . : ",,' . . , '.' _ I, ' ,', I,' . ~ .' ", : ,A r J , . L ' '. . .' I. I ."..... (;. ',' I f' '~ i . ..' t \,'."'. south property line are in conformance with the city clear space requirements; 3) the pool equipment, if less than 30 inches in height, shall be screened; if more than 30 inches in height, it shall be relocated outside the clear space; 4) the color, materials and six-inch picket spacing of the particular fence style indicated by the attachment in this application shall be used and 5) all requisite building permits shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Homer, Plisko, Gans and voted "aye"; Mr. Johnson voted "nay". Motion carried. The meeting recessed from 2:45 p.m. to 3:47 p.m. 5. L.O.M., Inc (Surf West Inc) for variances of (1) 3 percent to permit 48 percent building coverage where 45 percent maximum is allowed; (2) 5 ft. t.o permit. a building setback of 10 ft from N GUlfview Blvd where 15 ft is required; (3) 11.4 ft. t.o permit a building setback of 3.6 ft from Papaya st where 15 ft is required; (4) 9.1 ft to permit a building setback of 6.4 ft from rear (north) property line where 15.5 ft is required; and (5) 6.5 ft to permit. a building setback of 6 ft from side (east) property line where 12.5 ft is required at 24 Papaya st, Clwr Beach Park on Clwr Beach Island, Lots 29 thru 32, zoned CR 28 (Resort commercial). V 93-08 Mr. Homer 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 new commercial retail building on a substandard lot on Clearwater Beach. Discussion ensued regarding building coverage, setbacks and density requirements for the subject property. Concern was expressed in hearing this request as it was felt the variances being requested are not substantially different from those denied in a previous application heard on December 10, 1992. It was felt hearing this case within six months of the previous request violates the code. Assistant City Attorney Lance noted it is within the discretion of the Board to determine whether or not the request should be heard. Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, addressed concerns regarding the property being overdeveloped and explained differences in the current application. He presented an aerial view of the subject property and related the proposal to what exists in the area. He stated the current proposal reflects a ten percent reduction in building size and is a minimal and reasonable request. Due to the irregular shape of the property, and adjacent buildings being built to the lot lines, he stated visibility is needed for the business. Mr. Cline said Papaya street is unusually wide for DCAB Minutes 01/28/93 7 t., " .......... ~ a side street with a lot of view corridor. He indicated the proposal will be aesthetically pleasing, enhance the neighborhood, meet open space requirements, provide on-site parking and improve, not impede, the view corridor. In response to a question, Mr. cline indicated the covered walkway on Papaya street is being requested for handicapped access and aesthetics. David Himes and Richard Bekesh, representing the applicant, discussed the proposed parking plan, alternatives to the proposed canopy and FEMA requirements. It was indicated heavy landscaping and a ramp for handicapped access will be provided and pedestrian traffic on Papaya Avenue will be drawn by the architectural features of the building. Avi Ova}min, co-owner and applicant, stated this project will improve the property and has the support of the neighbors. He said he wants to satisfy the City and the neighbors and feels this is the smallest viable project which can be built on the site. Mr. Shuford left the meeting at 4:15 p.m. In response to a question, it was stated there will be only one store on the property, selling upscale clothing and beach wear. Discussion ensued with regard to the application. While it was indicated the design is in keeping with the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force, obj ection was expressed to the papaya Street setback variance. It was felt granting the application would compromise the Code and set an unwanted precedent. (1) 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 are unique to the property and might be necessary to create an image consistent with the recommen- dations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force and the particular physical and topographical 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 by creating a distinct business disadvantage subject to the conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. There was no second. DCAB Minutes 8 01/28/93 '.'.!, ','.' . .....I~:..l .',. , I .I.~:...'I' ".....,~:.....:_;_..__... ".',\" ".'" .' ',' """.', . ..i .,' - . .I'T.. , f .... ( ) .... ...." (2) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved t.o grant variance #1 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 variance is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship subject to the conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (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 abstained. Motion carried. Variance #1 granted. (3) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #2 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 subject to the condition the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Mr. Gans voted "aye"; Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Plisko, and Johnson voted "nay"; Mr. Homer abstained. Motion failed. (4) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson moved to deny variance #2 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 no unnecessary hardship was shown; the granting of the variance would be materially detrimental or injurious to other property in the neighborhood and 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 upon the vote being taken, Ms. whitney, Messrs. Pliska and Johnson voted "aye"; Mr. Gans voted "nay"; Mr. Homer abstained. Motion carried. Variance #2 denied. (5) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to deny variance #3 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 no unnecessary hardship was shown; the variance is not the minimum and the granting of the variance 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 upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Pliska, Gans and Johnson voted "aye"; Mr. Homer abstained. Motion carried. variance #3 denied. DCAB Minutes 01/28/93 9 r", ......-~ (6) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variances #4 and #5 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 particular physical surroundings and topographical 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 subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vota being taken, Messrs. Plisko and Gans and voted "aye"; Ms. Whitney and Mr. Johnson voted I1nay". Due to a tie vote, discussion ensued regarding whether or not to continue this item to the next meeting, or to reconsider the motion. Consensus was to reconsider the decision regarding variances #4 and #5. (7) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #4 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 specifical- ly because, the variance arises from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused by the owner or applicant and the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical condi- tions of the property involved and the strict application of the provisions of this development code would result in an unnecessary hardship upon the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. There was no second. (8) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson moved to deny variance #4 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 DCAB Minutes 10 01/28/93 /:'j..~.. '....' ~.' . ". '. I. ..."....'.. ,; '..:~" '.,'.. '.' ,'..... "','. .~... . . r,. .....: /...,.... I.' '. ." Code because the hardship was caused by the owner or applicant and the granting of the variance 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 upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Pliska and Johnson voted "aye"; Mr. Gans voted "nay"; Mr. Horner abstained. Motion carried. Variance #4 denied. (9) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #5 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 specifical- ly because, the variance arises from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused by the owner or applicant and the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical condi- tions of the property involved and the strict application of the provisions of this development code would result in an unnecessary hardship upon the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. There was no second. t' ""', (10) Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson moved to deny variance #5 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 the hardship was caused by the owner or applicant and the granting of the variance 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 upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Plisko and Johnson voted "ayell; Mr. Gans voted IInay"; Mr. Homer abstained. Motion carried. Variance #5 denied. Mr. Plisko left the meeting at 5:45 p.m. and Ms. Whitney chaired the meeting. 6. Decade properties, Inc for variances (1) of 10.2 ft to allow a side setback of 19.8 ft where 30 ft is required; (2) of 29.2 ft to allow a stair tower and a 48 in high non-opaque fence for pool, to encroach 19.8 ft into the required clear space of 48 ftj (3) to allow motel rooms in excess of 500 sq ft; and (4) 3 ft to allow a 2 ft wide landscape strip where 5 ft is required at 850 Bayway Blvd, Bayside Sub No 6, unit A, Blk D, Lot 12 and Unit C, Blk D, Lots 13 thru 15, zoned CR 28 (Resort commercial). V 93-09 ~.....,. ... DCAB Minutes 11 01/28/93 , . . ., , . . . :, . .. . .' .' " I .. I " ' . .,' '_.' " I " -. I I' I.. -. . I J . " . j . ,'. .:. '. j ~. " . ~ ' 'I. /,' Planner Ted Clarke explained the application in detail stating the applicant is requesting the var iances to. permit the use of an existing waterfront property on Clearwater Beach which includes 24 hotel/motel units, one apartment unit and 27 marina slips. Exterior modifications proposed are a stair tower on the west side of the building and reconfiguration of the parking lot. It was noted three related variances were granted by the Development Code Adjustment Board on November 14, 1991; however, the variances have expired. The Planning and Zoning Board approved the marina with 27 slips at its November J, 1992 meeting, subject to conditions. ( . , 'uJ. Gary Welsh, representing the applicant, stated replacement of the stair tower is required by the Fire Code. He said the original variances were granted to locate the stair tower in line with the existing building; however, the final design dictated the change in the stair tower location. The proposed location for the tower is around the corner from the original site, with a minimum encroach- ment into the side setback. Mr. Welsh stated the original variances expired due to a delay in the sale of the building. In response to questions, Mr. Welsh stated after being denied a parking variance, it was decided to eliminate proposed restaurant facilities and pursue a strictly hotel/motel/dock use. He in- dictated the units will range in size from 310 to 700 square feet. Concerns were expressed regardlng the possibility the larger units could be subdivided by a future owner. Discussion ensued regarding parking requirements. The city Traffic Engineering Department recommended one accessway to Bayway ?oulevard be removed and the parking lot be restriped to allow for handicapped parking and internal circulation. One letter from an adj acent property owner was submitted in opposition to the application. Mr. Welsh stated, in response to questions, there will be no on- site fueling and no yacht sales. There is currently one liveaboard at the marina. He indicated a local firm has been obtained to get the necessary permits. Concern was expressed regarding the number of variances being requested and it was felt this was necessary in order to have reasonable use of the property. In response to a question, Mr. Welsh stated there is no intent to fence the pool unless requested by the insurance company. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Homer moved to grant variances #1 and #2 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 property was built for a different purpose than its current , ~r; DCAB Minutes 12 01/28/93 (IF '"" ,-, proposed use and under a different set of building rules and the proposed pool location is the only logical place, subject to the conditions: 1) the variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicants, including maps, plans and the floor plans initialled and dated 1-28-93 by the applicant's representative and submitted to the Planning Department at this hearing, 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 effect; 2) prior to the issuance of a building permit, a revised plan shall be submitted to include the following: a) a tabulation table showing the Land Development Code requirements and the proposed site data for parking, perimeter and interior landscaping, screening, and handicap parking; b) redesign of the dock to meet the three concerns of the harbormaster and c) an accurate plan that reflects the existing and proposed conditions on the site; 3) no on-site fueling or liveaboards shall be permitted; 4) any additional commercial vessel activity (including but not limited to the number of vessels or an increase in the number of passengers served by those vessels) other than the existing Zenith Charter operation (at its current level of opera- tion), shall require additional conditional use permit approval; 5) not more than 27 slips shall be permitted; no tie-ups shall be permitted on the easternmost side of the dock and this area shall be appropriately signed to prohibit boats from tying up to the dock in this area; 6) all transient vessels shall meet all City Code requirements; 7) the applicant shall obtain an occupational license within one year of the date of this public hearing; 8) the applicant must submit site plans for the review process with regard to the proposed motel development; 9) the units shall not be sold as time-shares or condominium units; 10) these variances apply to the owner/applicant only; 11) all of the conditions upon which this variance was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board will likewise apply to the granting of this variance and 12) the requi- site building permit shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. variances #1 and #2 granted. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #3 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 var iance is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship created by the existing building subject to the above conditions plus an addition to condition #9 that the units shall not be subdivided or changed in size at any future time from the original plans submitted at this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Variance #3 granted. Discussion ensued regarding landscaping standards and it was indicated the landscaping requirements meet the average to balance with the property. DCAB Minutes 13 01/28/93 . . /' ... '. .' , " ',' " " . '. ,_ ..' " . ~ ','. ~" \ ',' '; '. 'I, ';.' ,,' , .. " ,.' '.' -,,-,~-,\ (" ) ~~lt \,*-",;J Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #4 as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in section 137.012 Cd) of the Land Development Code subject to the first 12 conditions and: this variance shall apply only to the east side property line. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Variance #4 granted. 7. Ginez HOldings, Inc (Ho Jo Inn) for a variance of 5 parking spaces to permit 10 new marina slips with zero additional parking spaces provided at 656 Bayway Blvd, Bayside Sub No 5, Blk A, Lots 15 thru 20, and riparian rights, zoned CR 28 (Resort commercial) and AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal). V 93-10 The applicant requested this item be continued to the next meeting to allow a conditional use request for marina use to be heard prior to this request. Mr. Homer moved to continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. II. Board and staff Discussion III. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman Consensus was to continue this item to the meeting of March 4, 1993. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5:46 p.m. ,&V?,~c. ~~ Vl./CAChairman NI'TEST ~ ,"-, h,.c/} Assis DCAB Minutes 01/28/93 14 ~' '.~ ',' ~ 4 .: '. J ,__ I .' .. r. '-." ' . " ff FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS ~"4;;;F;~"Sl 6~1I~)I.E ~trk4A(/tl f~, MAILING AtJUIl.[,SS lctJ'Od>X Si ('11 \' C!~AffpV~ ~~:~lfJ:::f4;;IMA1~~~;;nEE 1IlE IIOA" ), cOllsen.. lOOM MISS/US, !lItO"I! YO" l'OMMlrl E1: ON \1.'111<:11 1 SI'lwE IS ^ ll~ll OF. ;;3 COUl'iI\' (y ~r I' th1 5' D COUSH' o OllIFF!. Ul('AI. M.ESey D Etl'C"lI VI: AI'I'OI/l;'IIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the cOUllly, city, or other locallevcl of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or commiuec. llapplies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presellled with a voting connict of interest undcr Section] 12.3]43, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a connict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pa~' close attention to the instructions on this form before completing 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 other IOCe1] public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measuTC which inures to his special private gain. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on n measurc which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a governmcnt agency) by whom he is retained (including the parent org.1J1i7~ltion or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which hc is retained); to the spedal privatc gain of a relativc; or to the special private gain of it business associate. Commissioners of community redcyelopml:nt agencies under Sec. ] 63,356 or 163,357. F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected all a one-acre, one-vote basis arc not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relativc" includcs only the officer's fathcr, mothcr, SOil, daughter, husband, wife, father-in-Jaw, mother-in- Jaw, son-in-law. and daughter-in-]aw. A "business associatc" means an)' person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the o(fjcer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporatc shareholder (where the shares of the corporation ~re not listed on any national or regional stock exchange), ELECTED OFfICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situ:llions described aho\'e. you lUust disclosc 11ll: conniet: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publici)' stating to the asscmbly the nalllre of your intl:fest in the measure on which you arc absl41ining from voting: and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFrER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the persoll responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minules. APPOlNTED OFFlCERS: Although you must abSla in from voting in the situations described above. )'ou otherwise may pa nicipate in Ihesemallers, II owcver. you must disclosc Ihl: nature of Ihe connict before making iln)' allempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by YOll or at YOllr dircelion. IF YOU INTEND TO 1\'IAKE ANY A"ITEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO TilE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WLL BE TAKE1\: --~ You must complete and /ile this form (before making any :iltcmpl to innuence the decision) with . rccording the minutes of the mecting. who will incorporate the form in the minutes. . A copy of the form lIlust he provided immediately to the olher membcrs of lhe agency, . The form must be read publicly ..I the next l1leetin~ aftcr the form is filed. Ihe person responsible for CE FOltM ~J\ . 10.91 I 'Mil: 1 IF YOU MAKE NO A1TEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECisION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION ATTHE MEETING: · You must disclose orally the nature of your connict in the measure before participating. · You mus.t complete the form and file it within 15 days after the \'ole occurs with tre person responsible for recording the mimi' the meeting, who musl incorpornte the form in the minules. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the .......1 members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly atlhe next meeting after the form is filed. I. ... "bt.. r tAl .~~ /t DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST , hereby disclose that on V~' · ~ 197:5 ,19_: (a) A measure came or will come before my agency whic (check one) _ inured to my special private gain; _ inured to the special gain of my _ inured to the special gain my relative, _ inured to the spec' gain of whom I am r' lIled; or _ inured t c special gain of is the parent organi711tion or subsidiary of II principal which has retained me. (b) The meaSUre before my agency and thc nature of my conflicting intcrest in the measure is as follows: AI/ke,-I h ..... ~MT t,l/- C<'/l..jtltl,;r':.r ,'-( td....~t T 7/'-- .4 /J1~di2 50/ ~~~n. . . by , which .~ i cI.Ii/Jrt/ ff...~~ t/f_3-0~ ... ~.~ NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLOHIDA ST~\TUTES *[12.317 (1991). A FAILUHE TO MAKE ANY REC. ;[) DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOI{ AND !\fA Y BE PUNISHED BY Ol\'E OR MORE OF THE FOI.LO\\~j,<G' I M PEACH M ENT. REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FRO~' OFFICE OR E!\1 PI.OYMENT. DEMOTION, REDUCTION I~ SALAR Y. REPRI MAND. OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5.000. CE 1'01{ M ~Il . J(PIl I'ACil