10/14/1993 (2)
I ,
/
(
Mo.,".'
DCAB
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
DATE
/0/14/9.3
;27
/ ;2()3
r';'""\
(
'"~.",,
ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, October 14, 1993 - 1 :00 p.m. - Commission Meeting Room,
City Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
Piedge of Allegiance and Invocation
To consider requests for variances of the land Development Code:
I. Public Hearings
ITEM A - (continued from 8/26/93) - Sun Watch, Inc. for a variance of 5 ft to allow
a structure 95 ft in height where 90 ft is allowed at 670 Island Way, Sec 05-29-15, M&B
31.011, zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residential!. V 93-55
Continued to the meeting of October 28, 1993.
ITEM B - (continued from 9/9/93) - Rayford & Betsy K Hixon Jr for variances of (1)
9 ft to allow a structure 16 ft from west property line at 821 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay
Sub, Blk 39, Lot 1 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential) V 93-65
A ctlon: Applicant withdrew the portion of the variance relative to the proposed garage.
Board granted the variance solely for the stairway to extend 9 feet into the 25 ft front yard
setback area subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the
requisite building permit shall be obtained within one (1) year from the date of this public
hearing.
1. City of Clearwater, for variances of (1) 59 ft to allow a dock length of 91.5 ft
where 32.5 ft is permitted; (2) 17.25 ft to allow a dock width of 40 ft where 22.75 ft is
permitted; and (3) 7.5 ft to allow a setback of 12.5 ft from extended property lines where
20 ft is required at 201 Magnolia Drive, submerged land west of Magnolia Dr, zoned ALlC
(Aquatic Land/Coastal). V 93.66
Continued to the meeting of October 28, 1993.
2. Investors Breakers-on~the-Bay ltd, for a variance of 138 ft to allow dock length
of 405 ft where 267 ft is permitted at 2909 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, William Brown's Sub of
Bayview, Lots 14 & 15, part of Lots 5, 6 & 13, vacated street and submerged land to the
south, zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residential) & ALlC lAquatic Land/Coastal). V 93-67
Continued to the meeting of November 17, 1993.
DCAB Action
1
10/14/93
~:".t.
r~
"'ll!\I..;.J'.
3. Edward & Joyce R Holdgate, III for a variance of 19.4 ft to permit a structure 5.6
ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 31 Bohenia Circle, Mandalay Sub, Blk
14, Lot 4, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93-68
Action: Granted a variance of 9 feet to Dermit construction of a garage addition 16
feet from street right-of-wav in alignment with the existinCl Clarage subject to the following
conditions: 1) This 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 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.
4. William A & Doris H Ross, III, for variances of (1) 4 ft to allow a dock width of 36
ft where 28 ft is permitted; and (2) 5.5 ft to allow a setback of 14.5 ft from extended
property lines where 20 ft is required at 125 Devon Drive, A replat of Bayside Sub, Lot 48,
part of Lot 47, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93-69
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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 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.
5. Barnett Bank of Pinellas County, for a variance of 2 It to allow a fence height of
6 ft where 4 ft is permitted at 1610 Missouri Avenue, Sec 27-29-15. M&B 21.01 &
21.011 and Loveland Sub, Lots 3, 4 and 14-22, zoned CC (Commercial Centerl and RM
12 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-70
Action:. Granted as requested subjec t to the folio wing conditions: 1) This 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 this variance being null and
of no effect; 2) the fence slwuld be colored green to enhance the aesthetics of the area
and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date
of this public hearing.
DCAB Action
2
10/14/93
. :.' +'t,:~ ,:0/ " "~". "I"I'~' ."" ~~,,>:,.' ,'~,~II~>" ",~...:......:::.....- ,.,.1 ,,' ,',. " ~"I" . I 'r"".., ' .I~'
~.,.)
I ,
6. Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services Ine, for a variance of 10ft to allow
structures 15 ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 701-709 Margo Avenue
&. 700-712 Nicholson Street, Ira E Nicholson Add, Blk 1, Lots 1-9 less street right-of-ways,
zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93-71
Action: t Granted as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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 this variance being null and
of no effect; 2) the additional right-of-way, as requested by the Public Works Department
for Nicholson Street and Margo A venue shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of a
building permit for the proposed seven single family homes on Lots 1-9, Ira E. Nicholson
Addition and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within one (1) year from the
date of this public hearing.
II. Approval of Minutes - August 26, September 9 and September 23, 1993.
AJJIJroved as submitted.
(,,_, III. Board and Staff Discussion
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
~ ,
0..........1
DCAB Action
03
10/14/93
r'"
-{
r ';
''''q;ll-'''
\.
-.,...
DEVELOPMENT CODe ADJUSTMENT BOARD
October 14, 1993
Members present:
Alex Plisko, Chairman
Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chairman
Otto Gans
John B. Johnson
Joyce E. Martin
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney
Sandy Glatthorn, Senior Planner
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 8/26/93) - Sun Watch, Inc. for a variance of 5 ft to
allow a structure 95 ft in height where 90 ft is allowed at 670 Island Way, See
05-29-15, M&B 31.011. zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residentiall. V 93-55
Staff requested a continuance to allow time for the site plan to go before the City
Commission.
Ms. Whitney moved to continue this item to the meeting of October 28, 1993.
lTEM B - (continued from 9/9/93) - Rayford & Betsy K Hixon Jr for variances
of (119ft to allow a structure 16ft from west property line at 821 Bay
Esplanade, Mandalay Sub, Elk 39, Lot 1 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8 (Single
Family Residential) V 93-65
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained this application was continued due to a tie vote on the
above described variance. Staff was requested to check on the effective status of previously
granted variances and permits and whether or not they were still in effect due to the applicant
having changed the building design. It was determined the new plans will require application
for a new building permit and the previous variance would no longer apply.
DCAB Minutes
1
10/14/93
r",\
...........'
~..
The current request is to allow construction of a new, elevated single~family dwelling on a
corner lot. The side street is unimproved right.of~way.
Staff indicated the application does not appear to comply with several of the standards for
approval of a variance.
Harry Cline. attorney representing tho applicant. stated the applicant is withdrawing the
portion of the variance relative to the proposed garage. The current request is solely for the
stairway. In 1990 and 1991. the applicants obtained the necessary approvals and began to
modernize their house. The "No Name" storm of 1993 caused flooding damage and the
decision was made to change the plans, tear down what was existing and elevate the new
structure. He felt the request is minimal and reasonable due to the stairs being necessary for
access to the elevated structure and there will be no adverse impacts to the vista.
Patty Stough, architect representing the applicant. responded to questions regarding drawings
of the proposed stairway. It was indicated an amended drawing of the stairs has been filed
and the wooden stairs will not be covered.
Four letters were submitted in support of the application.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant the
variance solely for the stairway to extend 9 feet into the 25 ft front yard setback area
because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in
Section 45.24 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 fact the
home is in the flood zone and is being elevated. subject to the following conditions: 1) This
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 this variance being null and of no effect
and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within one (1) year from the date of this
public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Mses. Martin
and Whitney and Mr. Pliska voted "aye"; Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "nay". Motion
carried.
,. City of Clearwater, for variances of (1) 59 ft to allow a dock length of 91.5
ft where 32.5 ft is permitted; (2) 17.25 ft to allow a dock width of 40 ft where
22.75 ft is permitted; and (3) 7.5 ft to allow a setback of 12.5 ft from
extended property lines where 20 ft is required at 201 Magnolia Drive,
submerged land west of Magnolia Dr. zoned AL/C (Aquatic Land/Coastal).
V 93-66
DCAB Minutes
2
10/14/93
("-....,
-""".,
'..'
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the City of Clearwater has
owned and maintained a public pier pavilion at this site since the 1920's. The pier was
destroyed by the uNo Name" storm of t 993 and it was felt to be in tho public interest to
restore the pier to its original configuration. Staff indicated the application appears to comply
with the standards for approval of a variance.
Scott Shuford, Director of Central Permitting, gave a brief history of the dock and submitted
photographs, including an aerial view of the site, as it existed prior to the storm. He stated
the dock being on a public right-of-way is a unique condition and attempts are being made to
restore it as close as possible to what previously existed, while meeting environmental
requirements and ensuring a minimal impact on the surroundings. The application has been
reviewed by local and state environmental agencies and is felt to be a very character defining
feature of the Harbor Oaks neighborhood.
Mr. Shuford stated there is some neighborhood concern regarding lack of parking and use of
the dock at night. He stated the signs designating no parking and closing hours of the facility
will be retained and the design provides for interior lights at night.
In response to questions, Mr. Shuford stated there was joint support from the City and the
public to rebuild; however support was not universally shared by members of the surrounding
neighborhood. The City Commission considered and authorized proceeding with the rebuilding
and it was not a staff decision.
Terry Jennings, Chief Engineer with the City Public Works Engineering Division, responded to
questions. He stated staff has not directly contacted the City Police Chief: however, police
are aware of the situation in the neighborhood through reports and conversations with the
residents. If the property is posted, the police have the authority to remove anyone there
after closing hours. He said l1e would request the City Traffic Engineering Department to post
a sign with the closing hours at the entrance to the one-way street.
Five property owners and one representative spoke in opposition to the application as follows:
Robert Kim, 32 t Lotus Path, said there have been many meetings with the City, expressing
concern with the application. If the dock is rebuilt. he supports police involvement and the
signs and lights recommended by staff.
Harold Hyatt, stated he has lived there since 1945. The storm destroyed the old dock, which
in turn caused over $200,000 damage to his property. He stated people coming to the dock
threaten and harass the surrounding property owners, creating a violent and dangerous
situation. He did not feel this would occur without a dock and was opposed to any rebuilding.
George Cousins, 205 Magnolia Drive, stated he has lived at the entrance to the pavilion for
three years and it was dangerous to go down to the dock. He did not want the dock because
he felt it had become a public nuisance. The Jack of parking and toilet facilities at the dock
caused problems on his property. He supported a park-like setting at the end of the road,
possibly extending slightly into the water, but not an extended dock. If the dock is rebuilt.
he felt it should have a high wrought iron fence with a locking gate. Discussion ensued
regarding who would be responsible for locking and unlocking the gate.
DCAB Minutes
3
10/14/93
Mike Reeser, attorney representing Charles Walker, who owns property at 208 Magnolia
Drive, restated similar problems to those expressed above. It was noted the large sections
"'-" which broke off the dock during the storm battered his property, causing over $200,000
damage. The City has not shown any hardship necessitating this variance.
Cedio Saltarelli, president of the Harbor Oaks Homeowner's Association, stated the dock is
dangerous because thugs chase and attack anyone who tries to get in the way of their good
time. He asked for extra protection for the residents because the police sometimes cannot
respond to calls for three to four hours. He felt they are better off without the dock for the
peace and tranquility of the City. He expressed concern only those property owners within
200 feet were notified of this hearing and the association did not have enough time to
prepare.
Nigel Mansell, 802 Druid Road, stated he owns three properties in the neighborhood. He has
called police, signed special enforcement papers and has six surveillance cameras monitoring
his property. He said he has witnessed trespassers coming along the back of the seawall
approaching the dock. He and his family have been threatened while standing in their own
yard. He stated even with police protection, the people causing the problems have no respect
for authority and felt it is important to consider the repercussions this could have in the future
regarding safety and media attention.
Mr. Shuford expressed concern with the citizens' comments, stating he was not aware of the
police issue and the nocturnal activities on the site. He requested a continuance to allow time
to obtain copies of police reports and examine the liability aspects of the matter.
Three letters were submitted in opposition to the application.
( In response to a question, Terry Jennings stated City Commission direction was given to
replace what was existing and the decision was not made at a public hearing, but routed
through the City Manager's office.
Mr. Shuford stated he would like to have the opportunity to make sure this application can
meet the standards for approval of a variance and to look at ways of mitigating the negative
issues. He felt, as this matter had strong City Commission approval, they should be made
aware of the concerns of the public and the Development Code Adjustment Board. He
requested a continuance to October 28. 1993.
Discussion ensued with it being felt the City Commission should be informed of the
controversy surrounding this issue. It was noted a smaller dock could be built without
variances.
Mr. Gans moved to continue this item to the meeting of October 28, 1993. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
DCAB Minutes
4
10/14/93
2. Investors Breakers-on-the-Bay ltd, for a variance of 138 ft to allow dock
length of 405 ft where 267 ft is permitted at 2909 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, William
Brown's Sub of Bayview, Lots 14 & 15, part of Lots 5, 6 & 13, vacated street
and submerged land to the south, zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residential) &
ALlC (Aquatic Land/Coastal). V 93-67
, '--"
',".'. ,..'( ..., ~ ~.~.L" j,'L' ,~I" '-.: ~'."."!' t,.L.~,:"': i . ';', ',:.' ~, " .. ~ . :'" : . '.. ,'~ ": I'.' .... '.,': I
In accordance with a request from staff, Ms. Whitney moved to continue this item to the
meeting of November 17, , 993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
~..~ .
3. Edward & Joyce R Holdgate, III for a variance of 19.4 ft to permit a structure
5.6 ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 31 Bohenia Circle,
Mandalay Sub, Blk 14, Lot 4, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93.68
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
construct a two-car garage on the side of an existing one-car garage which is attached to a
single family residence. Staff did not feel the request supports the standards for approval,
the situation was created by the applicant, the request is not minimal and there is existing
reasonable use of the land; that being a single-family residence with attached garage and pool.
Edward Holdgate, owner and applicant, stated more space is needed to accommodate the
wheelchair of his invalid father-in-law. He felt there is a hardship due to the irregular shape
of the lot and the large setbacks. Mr. Holdgate illustrated his proposal with three-dimensional
models of the garage, which corresponded to drawings submitted with the application.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposal. It was indicated a hardship exists, this is an
unusual piece of property and the proposal would not have a great impact due to the double-
wide lot. However, concerns were expressed that the proposal is overbuilding and it is not
allowed to build beyond an existing non-conformity. Jt was noted variances have been
granted in the past to build 'in line with non-conforming structures.
.....,..
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 45.24 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 applicant's invalid father-in-law and the need for wheelchair access subject to
the following conditions: 1) This 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 resuJt 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.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant a
variance of 9 feet to permit construction of a garage addition 16 feet from street right-of~way
in alignment with the existing garage because the applicant has substantially met all of the
standards for approvcll as listed in Section 45.24 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 applicant's invalid father-in-law and the need for wheelchair
access subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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
,",-"
DCAB Minutes
5
10/14/93
, I, I . J :' I. .' ,'. . ~ ,'. ,'! ~'. ,: ., .' .,:'. . " ' " : ", . +" : I J .,. I : I' , " . I ' ~ , ' , r"'"'"
In accordance with a request from staff, Ms. Whitney moved to continue this item to the
meeting of November 17, 1993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
I-~'
3. Edward & Joyce R Holdgato. III for a variance of 19.4 ft to permit a structure
5.6 ft from street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 31 Bohenia Circle,
Mandalay Sub, Blk 14, Lot 4, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93-68
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
construct a two-car garage on the side of an existing one-car garage which is attached to a
single family residence. Staff did not feel the request supports the standards for approval,
the situation was created by the applicant, the request is not minimal and there is existing
reasonable use of the land; that being a single-family residence with attached garage and pool.
Edward Holdgate. owner and applicant. stated more space is needed to accommodate the
wheelchair of his invalid father-in-law. He felt there is a hardship due to the irregular shape
of the lot and the large setbacks. Mr. Holdgate illustrated his proposal with three-dimensional
models of the garage, which corresponded to drawings submitted with the application.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposal. It was indicated a hardship exists, this is an
unusual piece of property and the proposal would not have a great impact due to the double-
wide lot. However, concerns were expressed that the proposal is overbuilding and it is not
allowed to build beyond an existing non-conformity. It was noted variances have been
granted in the past to build in line with non-conforming structures.
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 45.24 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 applicant's invalid father-in-law and the need for wheelchair access subject to
the following conditions: 1) This 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 resuJt in this
variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite buiJding permit shall be obtained
within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. There was no second.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant. Ms. Whitney moved to grant a
variance of 9 feet to permit construction of a garage addition 16 feet from street right-of-way
in alignment with the existing garage because the applicant has substantially met all of the
standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land DeveJopment 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 applicant's invalid father-in-law and the need for wheelchair
access subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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
\
~,
DCAB Minutes
5
10/14/93
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. Plisko and Gans voted "ayell;
Ms. Martin and Mr. Johnson voted "nay". Motion carried.
The meeting was recessed from 3:06 to 3: 15 p.m.
4. William A & Doris H Ross, III, for variances of (1) 4 ft to allow a dock width
of 36 ft where 28 ft is permitted; and (2) 5.5 ft to allow a setback of 14.5 ft
from extended property lines where 20 ft is required at 125 Devon Drive, A
replat of Bayside Sub, lot 48, part of Lot 47, zoned RS 8 (Single Family
Residential). V 93-69
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
install a cradle lift in a wet slip area on an existing dock at his single family residence. It was
noted the City Harbormaster has no objection to the request and it appears to be consistent
with other docks in the area.
DCAB Minutes
6
10/14/93
Dave Griswold, contractor representing the applicant, stated the proposal is to reduce the size
of what is existing, replacing a 15-foot cradle lift with a similar lift of only 12 feet.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson moved to grant the
variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land Development Code, more specifically because
the variance is the minimum necessary to overcome what might otherwise have been a
" hardship subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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 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 carried unanimously.
5. Barnett Bank of Pinellas County, for a variance of 2 ft to allow a fence height
of 6 ft where 4 ft is permitted at 1610 Missouri Avenue, Sec 27-29-15, M&B
21.01 & 21.011 and Loveland Sub, Lots 3, 4 and 14-22, zoned CC (Commer-
cial Center) and RM 12 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-70
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
construct an overheight fence to secure a preservation area along Greenwood Avenue and
adjacent to an existing Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) wetland to the
east. The application indicates FDEP has recommended the proposed fence to protect the
wetlands from encroachment, trespassing, dumping and personal liability. Staff expressed
concern the proposed six-foot-high chain-link fence would not be aesthetically pleasing and
recommended landscaping.
I
.......'-
. :";' ; , J I' '1, " ',j' / . , ': ' . ~, ',,', ':,. . . ," . I ,
John Steinway, with George F. Young. Inc., stated the wetlands extend almost to the
property line now. He stated landscaping would be difficult and, if required, would have to
be placed in the right-of-way outside the fence. He felt having a green fence would hide it
to some extent.
In response to a question, Mr. Steinway stated the wetlands are being preserved to mitigate
wetlands being removed along Missouri Avenue. It was not known for what purpose the
property was being developed, but it was not for a whole bank facility. He stated it is
generally asked to fence in conservation areas to protect them from public dumping.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variance as requested In order to secure a preservation area because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code subject to the following conditions: 1 ~ This 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 this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the fence should be colored
green to enhance the aesthetics of the area and 3~ the requisite building permit shall be
obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
6. Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services (CNHS) Inc. for a variance of 10
ft to allow structures 15ft from street right-of.way where 25 ft is required at
701-709 Margo Avenue & 700-712 Nicholson Street, Ira E Nicholson Add, Blk
1, Lots 1-9 less street right-of-ways, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residentiall.
V 93-71
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
construct six single-family homes on nine..platted lots along the north side of Nicholson Street
and the south side of Margo Avenue to provide affordable housing through the Community
Development lnfill Housing Program. The applicant is cooperating with the City to provide
additional right-at-way and the variance is being requested to provide some back yard areas
for the new residences. Ms. Glatthorn corrected a note on the staff report, stating the
southwesterly lot is being combined with the adjacent lot in order to meet the 5,000 square
foot minimum for lot size.
Jerry Spilatro, with CNHS. stated they were delighted to get so many adjacent buildable lots
in the North Greenwood community. He discussed working with Public Works Director, Bill
Baker, on the right-of-way issue to allow for future expansion needs and tho proposed
improvements to Nicholson Street and Margo Avenue. He stated seven homes are being
proposed instead of six as noted on the staff report. He said all lots would meet minimum lot
size requirements. Mr. Spilatro discussed the building parameters of the proposed homes.
While the program was praised. concern was expressed with having to frequently grant
variances to setbacks. It was felt problems arise with having houses too close together and
the properties would be enhanced by having larger yards. Discussion ensued regarding the
project's proximity to the Pinellas Trail.
....,..
DCAB Minutes
7
10/14/93
f
"...........'
'.......__.... I
Steve Watrey, Economic Development Department, spoke in support of the application,
stating he works with the CNHS and Mr. Spilatro always does a good job. He said the City
fully supports the proposal.
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 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically because,
the variance arises from a condition which is unique to the property and is not caused by the
owner or applicant and the variance is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardships
subject to the following conditions: 1) This 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
this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the additional right-of-way, as requested by the
Public Works Department for Nicholson Street and Margo Avenue shall be dedicated prior to
the issuance of a building permit for the proposed seven single family homes on Lots 1-9, Ira
E. Nicholson Addition and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within one (1) year
from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
II. Approval of Minutes - August 26, September 9, and September 23, 1993
Mr. Johnson moved to approve the minutes of August 26, September 9, and September 23,
, 993, in accordance with copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
A question was raised regarding whether or not there had been any response to the letter sent
to Georgia Miller {V 93-60). Ms. Glatthorn indicated the letter came back from the post
office, who said they made an error and they would attempt to redeliver.
Discussion ensued regarding how the code citations listed on the staff reports are determined.
Staff was requested to investigate providing larger drawings of variance requests as was done
in the past. It was indicated smaller ones have been requested for reproduction purposes;
however. arEl difficult to read when they are reduced.
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
.<)- ?
. (:/ ~,-/-C ,/)
Chairman
DCAB Minutes
8
10/14/93