10/28/1993 (2)
DATE
27
DCAB
,I
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
/0/ .zr/tJ'3
-
/2/r;:
('."
.,
1 c '
'"
~ I
~..'
ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday. October 28,1993.1:00 p.m. - Commission Meeting Room,
City Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation
To consider requests for variances of the Land Development Code:
I. Time Extensions
1 . (2nd request for extension) - Louis J and Mary R D'Amico for variances of (1) 90 ft
to permit minimum lot width of 60 ft; (2) 3.30 ft to permit a second story building addition 8.70
ft from side property line; and (3) 5 ft to permit an inground pool 5 ft from side property line at 410
Harnden Dr, Columbia Sub No 4, Lot 10, Zoned CR 28 (re~ort commercial). V 92-49
Action:
Granted a six-month time extension to April 8, 1994.
II. Public Hearings
ITEM A - (continued from 8/26/93 & 10/14/93) - 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 Residential). V 93-55
Action:
Denied.
ITEM B - (continued from 10/14/93) - City of Clearwater for variances of (1) 59 ft to allow
a dock length of 91.5 ft where 32.5 ft is permitted; (21 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
Action:
Continued to the meeting of November 17, 1993
1. Investors Breakers-on-the-Bay Ltd for variances of (1) 138 ft to allow dock length of 405
ft where 267 ft is permitted; 12) to allow a dock structure within an aquatic land/coastal vegitativo
buffer where none is permitted at 2909 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, William Brown's Sub of Bayview, Lots
13 & 14, part of Lots 5, 6 & 15, vacated street and submerged land to the south, zoned RM 28
(Multiple Family Residential) & ALlC (Aquatic Land/Coastal}. V 93.67
Action:
Continued to tho meeting of December 9, 1993
2. Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services. Inc for variances of (1) 20 ft to allow a
minimum lot width of 50 ft where 70 ft is required; and {21 11 ft to allow a structure 14 ft from
street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 1000 Engman Street, C.E. Jackson's Sub. Blk 3, Lot
1, zoned RM 16 (Multi-Family Residential). V 93-72
DCAB Action
10/28/93
Action: Granted as requested subject to the foJ/owing 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.
,r-, 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.
3. William Jackson, Jr. & Annie M. Jackson for variances of (1) 10ft to allow a minimum
lot width of 40 ft where 50 ft is required; (2) 1,360 sq ft to allow a minimum lot area of 3,640 sq
ft where 5,000 sq ft is required; (3) 6% to allow 48% building coverage where 42% is permitted;
and (4) 2 ft to allow a structure 8 ft from rear property line where 10ft is required at 1164 Engman
Street, Greenwood Park #2, Blk D. Lot 65, zoned RM 12 (Multi-Family Residential). V 93-73
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 and 2) the requisite building permit shall be
obtained withlil six (6) months from the date of this public hearing.
4. James A. & Hazel E. Vogel for a variance to allow a vegetative buffer of 10ft where 25
ft is required at 3001 Enterprise Road, Landmark At Enterprise Sub, Lot 1, zoned OL (Limited Office)
and ALII (Aquatic Land/lnterior). V 93-74
"
w'
Action:
Denied.
5. Selim Vinca for a variance of 8 parking spaces to allow 0 spaces where 8 spaces are
required at 1478 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Boulevard Heights, Blk G, Lots 15 & 16 and part of Lot 17,
zoned CG (General Commercial). V 93-75
Action:
Denied.
DCAB Actiull
2
10128193
6. David R. little for variances of (1 ) 90 ft to allow a minimum lot width of 60 ft where 1 50
ft is required; (2) 10.65 ft to allow a structure 2.10 ft from side property line where 12.75 ft is
required; (3) 12.65 ft to allow a structure 3.10 ft from rear property line where 15.75 ft is required
at 333 S. Gulfview Blvd, Lloyd White Skinner Sub, Lot 67, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V
93-76
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 sire 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.
'..... "
~, :. ~ "-', I ,I' ...' 'i ',:'" I, _:', . . I, . " I" ~.. " ,I . t ..' _' ',' 'I' .' '. I"':~", l ~ . I. ,I, \ ~
7. Diocese of St. Petersburg for a variance of 2 ft to allow a fence 6 ft in height where 4 ft
is permitted at 400 S. Hillcrest Ave, Sec 15-29-15, M&B 14.03, zoned P/SP (Public/Semi-Public).
(....., V 93-77 ' '
(
"'I ~ ~,
\.
--
~ ' , I . ~ .' :: i . ~
Action: Granted as requested subject to the fol/owing 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.
To consider an application for the following Code Text amendment:
Ordinance No. 5490-93 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to "adult use establishments";
creating a new Article V within Chapter 41, Code of Ordinances, to establish regulations for the
operation of certain kinds of business establishments; adopting a statement of purpose and
legislative findings: defining terms; establishing minimum distances and other loeational
requirements; providing for the amortization of nonconforming adult use establishments; requiring
certificates of compliance or provisional certificates of compliance and adult use licenses for adult
use establishments, and establishing requirements for filing, review procedures, and other
requirements; providing for hardship relief; establishing operational requirements; prohibiting certain
conduct by operators of adult use establishments, by their employees, and by patrons within adult
use establishments; establishing hours of operation; providing for enforcement; providing for the
suspension or revocation of adult use licenses; providing an effective date.
\
J
Action:
Recommended approval of Ordinance No. 5490-93 as presented by Rob Surette.
II. Approval of Minutes - October 14, 1993.
Action: Approved as submitted.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
IV. Adjourn ment
DCAB Action
3
10/28193
f>,
r
'-/
'",---41
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
October 28, 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 :03 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 Jaw requires any applicant appealing a
decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
I.
Time Extensions
1. (2nd request for extension) - Louis J and Mary R D'Amico for variances
of (1) 90 ft to permit minimum lot width of 60 ft: (2) 3.30 ft to permit a second
story building addition 8.70 ft from side property line; and (3) 5 ft to permit an
inground pool 5 ft from side property line at 410 Harnden Dr, Columbia Sub No
4, Lot 10, Zoned CR 28 (resort commercial). V 92.49
Louis 0' Amico stated financing for the proposed remodeling of his home has been delayed
pending the sale of property up north. He wishes to add living space and a pool to his
(approximate) 500 square-foot I10me and he said he wilt obtain tile permits and complete the
work within six months.
Discussion ensued and it was explained to the applicant this will be the last time extension.
These variances will expire with the time extension and if additional time is needed, the
applicant will have to reapply for the variances.
Mr. Johnson moved to grant 3 six-month time extension to April 8, 1994, with the explicit
understanding there will be no more time extensions for these variances. The motion was
duly seconded and cnrried unanimously.
DCAB Minutes
1
10/28/93
...._o.c
'~c
'--
II.
Public Hearings
ITEM A. (continued from 8/26/93 & 70/74/93). 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 Residential).
V 93.55
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating this case was continued
from the meeting of August 26, 1993 to allow time for the applicant to submit a site plan
application for City Commission review. The site plan was reviewed and referred on October
21, 1993. The applicant wishes to construct a 1 O-story, 96-unit multiple family condominium
and is requesting the height variance to allow more space between ceilings and floors for the
placement of heating and air conditioning ducts through the units. The proposed design
utilizes an eight-inch slab between floors for greater wind loading support.
In response to a question, Ms. Glatthorn stated the site plan was a standard receipt and
referral item. The City Commission expressed no objection to the proposal and referred it for
Development Code Adjustment Board consideration.
Jeff Mendenhall and Jeff Smith, architects with The Scott Partnership, representing the
applicant. addressed the Board. Mr. Smith stated the proposal is for a nine.story living level
luxury cUllrJul1liniumuuilding il1lsh:lllu Estates. The proposed units range from 1,600 to 2,400
square feet. Mr. Mendenhall outlined their efforts to stay within the 90-foot height limitation
for the building. However, he stated, the engineers for the project increased the slab
thickness specifications to meet the wind load requirements and the space between floors to
meet upgraded mechanical requirements.
A cross section drawing of the proposal was submitted for the record and the calculations
were explained. Mr. Mendenhall stated, for mechanical efficiency and health reasons, larger
duct work is necessary and a few additional inches are needed between tloors to accommo.
date it.
In response to questions, it was indicated the proposed 90.foot height includes a 10-foot
bonus for having at least 50 percent of the required parking under the building. Mr.
Mendenhall said the increased specifications are taken from the Uniform Standard Building
Code.
One letter in opposition from an adjacent property owner was read into the record. Concern
was expressed the increased height of the proposal would increase heating and cooling costs
of.,the units in the adjacent building.
Concern was expressed the proposal exceeds the requirements of the Uniform Standard
Bui/ding Code. It was indicated any hardship is self-imposed because the number of floors
could be reduced to stay within the height limit.
DCAB Minutes
2
10/28/93
': .' .' . . I.' . ~.' .' .' . . .: . L .' . ' .' I . f .~.., ',' ... . . ; .... .' ~ . . . :. . .:. ' . . ;, II' ,',
f....-....
Mr. Mendenhall stated the project would not be feasible with fewer floors and/or dwelling
units and he felt the five additional feet being requested is a minuscule amount of increase.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Johnson 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 45.24 of the land Development Code because no
unnecessary hardship was shown; if a hardship exists it 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 35.04 and 35.05. The motion was duly seconded and upon
the vote being taken, Mses. Martin and Whitney, Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "aye"; Mr.
Plisko voted unay". Motion carried.
ITEM B - (continued from 10/14/93) - 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 1 2.5 ft from extended property lines where 20 ft is required
at 201 Magnolia Drive, submerged land west of Magnolia Dr. zoned ALlC
(Aquatic land/Caasta!). V 93-66
Ms. Glatthorn stated staff is requesting this item be continued to allow time for the City
Commission to review the issue on November 8, 1993 and decide whether or not they wish
to reconsider the matter. They are being requested to examine the opposition and the
concerns that were expressed at tho lost DCAB meeting and give staff additional direction.
(
+'-~
[n response to a question. Ms. Glatthorn said the Harbor Oaks Homeowners Association has
been notified of the continuance.
Two citizens were present to express their support of the proposal.
Ms. Whitney moved to continue this item to the meeting of November 17. 1993. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
1. Investors Breal<ers-on-the-Bay ltd for variances of (1l 138 ft to allow dock
length of 405 ft where 267 ft is permitted; (2) to allow a dock structure within
an aquatic land/coastal vegetative buffer where none is permitted at 2909 Gulf-
to-Bay Blvd, William Brown's Sub of Bayview, Lots 13 & 14, part of Lots 5, 6
& 15. vacated street and submerged land to the soutl1, zoned RM 28 (Multiple
Family Residential) & ALlC (Aquatic Land/Coastal). V 93-67
Senior Planner Glatthorn stated the City Environmental Management group wanted additional
information regarding this request and staff is recommending this item be continued to the
next meeting, Discussion ensued and it was indicated variance 1/1 was continued from a
previous meeting and variance # 2 was added to the request.
,
\........;,.../
DCAB Minutes
3
10/28/93
. ..... .~....
,
I,
.......
',-,..
Concern was expressed there are too many items on the agenda for the November meeting
and majority consensus was to hear this item on December 9, 1993.
Mr. Gans moved to continue this item to the meeting of December 9, 1993. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, loc for variances of (1) 20 ft to
allow a minimum lot width of 50 ft where 70 ft is required; and (2) 11 ft to
allow a structure 14 ft from street right-of.way where 25 ft is required at 1000
Engman Street, C.E. Jackson's Sub, Blk 3, Lot 1, zoned RM 16 (Multi-Family
Residential). V 93-72
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
construct a single-family residence on an existing non-conforming lot to provide housing for
the Inflll Housing Program. She noted several similar requests have been granted in the area.
Jerry Spilatro. Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (CNHS) explained the
proposal, stating three existing cottages on the lot will be torn down to make room for the
new house. In response to a question. he offered to guide the Board on a tour of the site.
Concern was expressed continuing to grant variances for this area will not bring it into
conformance. Staff was urged to take the appropriate steps to change the setback
requirements in this unique section of the North Greenwood area.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant. Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variances 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 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.
3. William Jackson, Jr. & Annie M. Jacl(son for variances of (1) 10ft to allow
a minimum lot width of 40 ft where 50 ft is'required; (2) 1,360 sq ft to allow
a minimum lot area of 3,640 sq ft where 5.000 sq ft is required; (3) 6% to
allow 48% building coverage where 42% is permitted; and (4) 2 ft to allow a
structure 8 ft from rear property line where 10ft is required at 1164 Engman
Street, Greenwood Park 112, Blk D, Lot 65, zoned RM 12 (Multi-Family
Residential), V 93-73
DCAB Minutes
4
10/28/93
. '4 I. .. I . >. ~. ' ~ M ~ ..' ~ . \., ,'~" \ ..' I I :..~' >. ,,", . ..i' . ' I, '. .' . '. . '. . , " ,
,,..-.......
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating this is another Clearwater
Neighborhood Housing Services project the applicant wishes to construct a single-family
house on an existing non-conforming lot. Staff noted the request appears to comply with the
standards for approval.
Concerns were expressed regarding the building plan, the small lot size and an adjacent piece
of City-owned land. Ouestions were raised regarding the proposal and it was indicated area
that would have been a garage will be used for a family room and extra storage. It is
proposed for the home owner to park in the driveway.
Jerry Spilatro stated the lot was owned by the Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services
(CNHS) and was sold to the applicant. He explained the difficulties with the lot size and
responded to questions regarding the building plan. He stated the family room is not to
extend beyond the front porch and the lot, being adjacent to the City-owned green space, has
the appearance of being a 70-foot-wide lot.
Concerns were expressed with eliminating the garage, with this not being a buildable lot, and
the request not being the minimum. In response to a question, it was stated the garage-type
door on the front of the house, while giving the appearance of a garage, will be the outside
access door to the storage area vital for bicycles, lawn mowers, etc.
('
-,'
Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the building plan could be changed. Mr. Spilatro
stated the applicant purchased the property, has the construction loan and the signed
contracts, and was at the point of applying for a building permit when the dimensional
problem with the lot was discovered. He did not know of a way to change the building plan
at this point.
William Jackson, Jr., the applicant, stated he has no need for a garage. He said he has four
children and needs the family room and storage for bicycles and toys. He chose this location
because it is near a playground and a football field and is convenient for him and his family.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variances 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 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
;n 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 21 the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (61
months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and upon the
vote being taken, Ms. Martin, Messrs. Pliska and Johnson voted "aye"; Ms. Whitney and Mr.
Gans voted "nay". Motion carried.
~.
DCAB Minutes
5
10/28/93
'. '. . '.,.... ....~.:.., '.:~. '. ~. .!. I. " '. ,I ,".. I.... ~ .....:" ~ '.~ ,"....' .J L '. . ' '.. j f '.
t. --..,
4. James A. & Hazel E. Vogel for a variance to allow a vegetative buffer of 10
ft where 25 ft is required at 3001 Enterprise Road, landmark At Enterprise
Sub, Lot 1, zoned OL (Limited Office) and ALII (Aquatic Land/Interior). V 93-74
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
construct three freestanding office buildings which encroach into environmentally sensitive
lands. The City Environmental Management group did not support the proposal, stating it
could significantly impact existing live oak trees and adjacent jurisdictional wetland. Staff
noted the request does not appear to comply with five of the standards for approval.
Edward Walker, architect representing the owner/applicants, stated the proposed infringement
is very minor in terms of square footage and will have little impact. He said the existing live
oak trees are very small, are not specimens and will not be harmed by nearby building. Mr.
Walker described the proposal. site conditions and setback requirements.
Richard Crossland, a dentist interested in building this proposal, discussed the required
buffers, parking requirements, site constraints and fire separation restrictions. He explained
the proposal is to build three single-story doctors' offices, each having its own private
entrance for ease of patient access. In response to a question, Dr. Crossland said the building
loan is ready, but cannot go through without the finalized plans. which depend on this
variance.
Discussion ensued regarding the application. While it was felt the proposal is minimal and will
not environmentally jeopardize the site, concern was expressed there is no hardship.
'-.,
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 any hardship that
exists subject to the following conditions: 11 This vuriance 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 (61 months from the date of this public hearing. There was no second.
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 45.24 of the Land Development Code because no unnecessary
hardship was shown; the need for tile variance was caused by the owner or applicant; the
variance is not the minimum and the granting of the variance would violate the general spirit
and intent of this development code, with particular reference to environmentally sensitive
wetlands, and as expressed in Sections 35.04 and 35.05. The motion WDS duly seconded
and upon the vote being taken, Ms. Martin, Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "aye"; Ms.
Whitney and Mr. Pliska voted "nay". Motion corded.
.~/
DCAB Minutes
6
10/28/93
" ~ . .' .'. . . ,....1 '.' . ' " . ,.' "', . . . I . : ~ ." I . . I. . - ~ '~ . . . . . ,.... '. , :' - . .
The meeting was recessed from 2:55 to 3: 12 p,m. Mr. Lance did not return.
5. Selim Vinca for a variance of 8 parking spaces to allow 0 spaces where B
spaces are required at 1478 GulHo-Bay Blvd, Boulevard Heights, Elk G, Lots
15 & 16 and part of Lot 17, zoned CG {General Commercial}. V 93-75
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant is requesting
the parking variance to allow the conversion of an existing commercial structure to a table
billiard establishment. She gave a history of the site and the area. The previous property
owner illegally paved the rear parking lot and was ordered to removed the paving; however
this was not done. The current owner has not indicated additional parking can be provided
in the area. It was noted the application does not appear to comply with any of the standards
for approval and staff did not support granting the variance.
Discussion ensued regarding whether or not a restaurant previously located on the site ever
opened.
Selim Vinca, the owner/applicant, gave a brief history of the site, stating he wishes to open
his billiard parlor and work toward improving the site as he acquires the funds. He said he is
willing to redo the parking lot and asked for six to twelve months time to provide legal
parking. He stated there is an old City lien on the property from a Code Enforcement Board
fine related to the illegally paved parking lot. Mr. Vinca submitted a drawing of the proposed
parking plan on the site and discussion ensued.
Mr. Lance returned at 3:30 p.m.
l",,: Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of grand fathering parking spaces for the site and
other means of meeting the requirement. Concern was expressed this site has a long history
of non-compliance. While Mr. Vince questioned the City' Zoning sections approval of the
application, it was indicated the City Traffic Engineering Department controls parking lots.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney 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 45.24 of the Land Development Code subject to
the information received from staff. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
6. David R. Little for variances of (1) 90 ft to allow a minimum lot width of 60
ft where 150 ft is required; (2) 10.65 ft to allow a structure 2.10 ft from side
property line where 12.75 ft is required; (3) 12.65 ft to allow a structure 3.10
ft from rear property line where 15.75 ft is required at 333 S. Gulfview Blvd,
Lloyd White Skinner Sub, Lot 67, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commerciall. V 93-76
Senior Planner Glatthom explained the application in detail. stating the applicant wishes to
replace a deteriorating foundation and wood support walls in the rear garage building of a real
estate office on an existing non.conformin9 lot. It would be difficult to acquire any more land
to make tIle lot size conforming due to being surrounded on three sides by the Americana Gulf
Motel.
IV
DCAB Minutes
7
10/28/93
\'
.....~ .
,
......~-
David Little, the owner/applicant. stated the request is to repair the existing foundation, which
will not enlarge the garage, or additionally encroach into the setbacks. The only change will
be a slight height increase to meet floodplain elevation requirements.
Concern was expressed with the request because it involves construction on an already non-
conforming building. It was felt that, while it is elevated, some attempt should be made to
move the garage back within the setbacks.
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 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 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. Mses. Whitney and Martin, Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "aye"; Mr.
Plisko voted "nay". Motion carried.
7. Diocese of St. Petersburg for a variance of 2 ft to allow a fence 6 ft in height
where 4 ft is permitted at 400 S. Hillcrest Ave, Sec 15-29-15, M&B 14.03,
zoned P/SP (Public/Semi-Public). V 93-77
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
construct a six-foot-high chain link fence along the north property line of the soccer field of
St Cecelia's School. The fence will limit and control access to and from the site for the
benefit and safety of the children using the soccer field. It was noted placing the fence at the
35-foot setback line would limit the soccer field area. Staff reported the application may
comply with the standards for approval is recommended conditions are met.
Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, stated the fence, which has already been
built, is needed for security for the children and against vandalism after hours. He outlined
the unique circumstances of the site and explained how the request meets the code criteria
for granting the variance. In response to a question, he stated a fence permit application was
filed and it was thought approval was obtained. The need for the variance was discovered
after the applicant was told it was okay to build the fence.
Based upon the, information furnished by the applicant. Ms. Whitney moved to grant the
variance as requested because the applicant has substantinlly mot 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, nJans. 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
DCAB Minutes
8
10/28/93
to..........
(
........ ~
l .
, ......,..'
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 {61
months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Mr. Lance left the meeting at 4:05 p,m.
To consider an application for the following Code Text amendment:
Ordinance No. 5490-93 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to "adult use
establishments"; creating a new Article V within Chapter 41, Code of
Ordinances, to establish regulations for the operation of certain kinds of
business establishments; adopting a statement of purpose and legislative
findings; defining terms; establishing minimum distances and other locational
requirements; providing for the amortization of nonconforming adult use
establishments; requiring certificates of compliance or provisional certificates
of compliance and adult use licenses for adult use establishments, and
establishing requirements for filing, review procedures, and other requirements;
providing for hardship relief; establishing operational requirements; prohibiting
certain conduct by operators of adult use establishments. by their employees,
and by patrons within adult use establishments; establishing hours of operation;
providing for enforcement; providing for the suspension or revocation of adult
use licenses; providing an effective date.
Assistant City Attorney Rob Surette made a presentation regarding the ordinance. He detailed
studies complied from inunicipalities, medical and law enforcement agencies regarding adult
business and the necessary distance intervals from protected uses. Discussion of the
available sites for this type of business in the City at various separation distances. He
explained the difficulties in drafting the ordinance in view of the constitutionality questions,
zoning and regulatory provisions. He gave an overview of what has been done by other
municipalities in determining allowable sites for adult businesses.
In response to a question, Mr. Surette indicated the City Commission will be the forum to
which variance applications are addressed.
Mr. Surette was commended for his report and discussion ensued.
Ms. Whitney moved to recommend approval of Ordinance No. 5490-93 as presented by Rob
Surette. The motion was duly seconded and curried unanimously.
III. Approval of Minutes of October 14, 1993
Mr. Gans moved to approve the minutes of October 14, 1993. in accordance with copies
submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimous! y.
DCAB Minutes
9
10/28/93
..-...
t :
c
\J'
IV.
Board and Staff Discussion
>,
In response to a question, Ms. Glatthorn stated Georgia Miller did not answer the correspon~
dance sent to her and she, therefore, forfeited her application fee.
V. Adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:03 p.m.
DCAB Minutes
Chairman
10
"
10/28/93