03/21/1994 (2)
~.;t:J;~l';;~~~~i~.:lJj;~':'Jt~'~:~; }4 f
~C'~~'" ~"r'",<,O"( , :," .. ' ""
{\t,:;i.',:;': ::~",',:; .\:'" .I '
; 4: < . . ~ . ;
':.,'[1" 1
"
I'
,'j
1 '
, .; ;~~. J
,If';. 't,
L:';';;;', ::,/
,t'lt~ /'
"
'If
"t
..
~', T
1
,-n _.
. ' ~l;'
,;
'"
'. . ~
. ~ r '
"" '
l'.".
"
",
:' ~ .~ f . I .
j +.'
.,
"
, ,
"
I . ~
0,
......
,d
V"
i 1- I.
o/.~;/:::';,: :";;:,, >
"f.
':
,: r:/i::;':~;~) i./"; ~':"~:~ '~":';{~;>'" ,0:': ,f
"
"
,"
~ J
~. .
. r
, .
','"
"
,"
l~~\~ ;:~:':;~ /..
; 'l2:)~;~~: . ~,'
. '~,.....:-' i .~'" t~~ t.
"~~~~!-I~;ik~~~": .~.
~,~;(~D:II,.oJ;" ",'
"..l,;i;~,I;!!;.'l; ': :" '" . ,
", ~~~~~ /~~ :. ~ .=
> ~'1''''''-''~' ", :: :' ','
, "bl~r:.~t;.,:" .
't; . ~;....~~I.~.~'~"" ~ f:'j''::.
:,'i':~;t:;:~..,::" '. . .
, ;.Ih?T>:,I>',::~'
. ,.' ~ " f . r
"
COMMISSION
",
"
City Commission
. ,
"
'o~. . >
:.I::I~'L:,.
. ,l/~~..~" !
\< "'. /~~ j",
., .~. :" I i[::{ ~
1l~~~.~ ,"
; '(..'~.'<'.
'1-""
,*[t!'~:: '
" ~ .r?-,'
. /"r" :
, c...~.~~~\<
:{),j;:.:,'
'''J 'h~"""" "
f~/~il,:
'~,!:,\~:r:.:
, 7<"
. ~~,\ ,'.
,',
DATE
.{i~1 / c;4
"
~LJL~?Lt..'
o:{~ 0'3
, '
.,
'.
!!
"rrC
.'l
, ,
,:'1
.~ < !
',J
'.'
.J
"
, "
~ <,"
.,
.p .-
""1:.' ,",
.'~... .,
~. '.
.1
'.
,',
,I
"
'J'
.'\
, t
"
','
+'t~.... .
',I,~.,;'~ .~.
I'
"
';,1'
..1
,I',
"
"
f(t}::t;C~'--, ">. ~ ~ ':,' '::'>~';~~'i :; ?i;:
! >
, ,
;, "
. '~,:' , " c'"
l~'. ::, i'" i.
"
, '
(""
ACTION AGENDA
City Commission Special Meeting
Sign Variance Requests
Monday, March 21, 1994 - 9:00 A.M.
ITEM A - (cant from 2-7-94) Valentin os Koumoulidis (Mr. Submarine) for variances of (11 24.5
sq ft to permit 88.5 sq ft freestanding sign; and (2) 293.9 sq ft to permit a total of 357.9 sq
ft of attached sign area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1010 Cleveland St.
Sarah McMullen's Sub, Blk 3, part of Lot 9, zoned UC(E) IUrban Center (Eastl. SV 92-97 -
Continued to 4/19/94.
, ,
ITEM 8 - (cant from 2-7-94) Richard O. Davison (Bay Area Neuro Muscular) for a variance of
7 ft in sign height to permit a 27 ft freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage to
remafn at 1450 Gulf-ta-Bav Blvd! Knollwood Replat, Blk 3, Lot 13. zoned CG (General
Commercial). SV 93-13 - Continued to 4/19/94.
ITEM C - (cant from 2-7-94) Arthur H. & Marv L. Bruno (Clearwater Mattress Co, Inc) for
variances of (,) 294.46 sq ft to permit a total of 354.46 sq ft of attached signage area; and
(2) one permanent window sign to permit 4 attached signs of the same type to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1659 Gulf-ta-Bav Blvd, Gulf-to-B'ay Shopping Center. Lots
3 & 4. zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-19 - Continued to 4/19/94.
'("'
ITEM D - (cant from 2-7-94) Halika ProDerties (Clearwater Mattress Co, lnc) for variances of
(1) 15ft to permit a freestanding sign 35 ft in height; (2) 2 above roof signs where such signs
are, prohibited; (3) 12 sq ft to permit 120 sq ft of attachE::d sing area on North face of
business; and (4) 150 sq ft to permit 229.5 sq ft of attached sign area on East face of
business to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 20258 US Hwv 19 N, See 18-29-' 6.
M&B 44.0'. zoned CH (Hig hway Commercial). SV 93-22 - Continued to 4/19/94.
ITEM E- (cant from 2-7-94) C!.Jrtis A & Marian Jackson (Clearwater Outboard) for variances
(1) of 209.6 sq ft to permit 273.6 sq ft of attached signage; (2) to permit a roof sign where
such signs are prohibited; and (3) of 4 attached signs to permit 9 attached signs to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 603 Missouri Ave S. Hibiscus Gardens, Blk V. Lots 6, 7,
8, 9A. 98 & 10 less street. zoned CG (General Commercial).
SV 93-60 - Regarding #1 - approved area variance of 89.7 square feet subject to the following
conditions: 1) there be no more than 4 attached signs, and 2) there will be no freestanding
sign: Denied #2 & #3.
ITEM F,. (cant from 2-7-94) Marks & Gilliss, Inc/Marks HoldinQ Co, Jne (Ken Marks Ford) for
variances of (1) 37.5 sq ft in area to permit a freestanding sign of 149.5 sq It; (2) 144 sq It
in area to permit an auxiliary sign of 200 sq ft; (3) 8 ft in height to permit an auxiliary sign of
20 ft in height; and (4) 18 ft in distance to permit an auxiliary sign with a distance of 282 ft
from the primary sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 24791 & 24825 US Hwv
19 N. Ken Marks Ford. Blk A, Lot 1 together with Ken Marks Ford 1 st Add Sub, Lot 1. zoned
CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-65 - Continued to 4/19/94.
L..
3/21/94
1
! ,
. ..'
, .
r'
ITEM G - lcont from 3-7-94) Manuel & Evannelino Kastrenakes lPinellas Rent A Carline) for
variances (1) of 16 ft to permit a 36 ft high freestanding sign; (2) of 64.8 sq ft to permit a
176.8 sq ft freestanding sign to remain; and (3) to permit a second allowable freestanding
sign to be oriented to same street as primary freestanding sign to permit nonconforming
signage to remain at 19206 US Hwv 19 N, See 19-29-16, M&B 14.06, zoned CH (Highway
Commercia\). SV 93-16 - Denied #1 & #3; Regarding #2 - approved a variance of 8 square
feet to permit a 120 square foot freestanding sign subject to the condition that the second
freestanding sign on the property be primarily oriented to Harn Boulevard, not exceeding a
height of 20 feet and an area of 50 square feet.
ITEM H - (cant from 3-7-94) True Realty Corp (Toys "R" Us) for a variance of 14.6 ft in height
to permit a freestanding sign of 37.6 ft in height to permit nonconforming signage to remain
at 26286 US Hwv 19, N, Village at Countryside, Parcel 4 Replat, Lot 2 less road on east,
zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-96 - Approved variance of 4.6'feet in height to allow
the rectangular portion of the sign to be at a height of 20 feet with Geoffrey (7.5 feet tall)
being placed at the top.
(,,:,
1. Charles J. & Jovce M. Eufemia lCharlies Italian American Restaurant) for variances of (1)
26 sq ft to permit a freestanding sign of 90 sq ft; and (2) 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign
o ft from street right-of-way (Cleveland St) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
1242 Cleveland St, Padgett's Estates Sub of Lots 20-~2, Lot 3, and part of Lots 2 & 4, zoned.
UC(E) (Urban Center (East). SV 92-82 - #1 withdrawn by applicant; #2 - Approved subject
to the following conditions: 1) the sign area be made to comply with code; 2) that by
constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and
applicant agree that no governmental 'agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or
removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain, road widening or
any other public purpose; and 3) if area variance is needed, the applicant may reapply for
same within six months at a $50 fee.
\
2. Branch Sunset Associates Ltd (Sunset Point Shopping Center) for variances of (1) 25 ft
in height to pe'rmit a 45 ft high freestanding sign (US 19 frontage), (2) 91.5 sq ft freestanding
sign to permit 241.5 sq ft of sign area (US 19); (3) 25 ft in height to permit a 45 ft high
freestanding sign (Sunset Point Rd frontage); and (4) 91.5 sq ft of freestanding sign area to
permit a 241 .5 sq ft freestanding sign (Sunset Point Rd) to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 23654-23698 US Hwy 19, N, Sec 6-29-16, M&Bs 41.01,41.02,41.04,41.05 &
41.06, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-43 - Denied #s 1 thru 4.
3. Searstown Partners/Sears Roebuck & Co (Georgia Optical) for a variance of 6.75 sq ft to
permit 26.25 sq ft of attached signage to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1269
Missouri Ave, S, E.F. Hanousek's Suh, Lots 11 & 12, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-
62 - Approved.
4. McDonald's COflloration/Franchise Realty Interstate (McDonald's) for a variance of 2.1 ft
to permit a 8.1 ft drive-through menu sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 539
Missouri Ave, S. Hibiscus Gardens, all of Blk T. zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-55 -
Approved subject to the condition that an opaque fence and/or landscaping be maintained at
a height of 6 feet along the east property line.
c.
3/21/94
2
i,
'--
;t. '
.<
(.~..
5. University High Eauitv Real Estate Fund/National Operatlnn, L.P. (Shell Oil) for a variance
of 1 freestanding'sign of 146 sq ft and 30 ft in height to permit a second freestanding sign
to remain to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 26998 US Hwy 19; N, See 30-28-1 6,
M&B 31 .04, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-63 - Approved a variance of one
freestanding sign with an area of 112 square feet and a height of 10 feet above the crown
of the roadway measured perpendicular from the roadway to the location of the sign (a height
of approximately 28 feet) to permit a second freestanding sign subject to the following
conditions: 1) no auxiliary sign be placed on this property, and 2) the sign permit be procured
within 60 days of this public hearing.
6. University Hiah Eauitv Real Estate Fund/National Operatinn, L.P. (Long John Silver's) for
a variance of 1 freestanding sign to permit an additional such sign, with 92 sq ft of sign area,
a height of 20 ft above the roadway and a setback of 3 ft from street right-of-way (US 1 9)
to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 26988 US Hwy 19, N, See 30-28-16, M&B
31.04, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-79 - Approved a variance of one freestanding
sign with an area of 92 square feet, a height of 10 feet above the crown of the roadway, and
a setback of 3 feet, to permit an additional freestanding sign subject to the following
conditions: 1) no auxiliary sign be placed on this property; 2) this sign be made to conform
to code within 60 days of this public hearing; and 3) that by constructing a sign within the
street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree 'that no governmental
agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property
is acquired by eminent domain, road widening or any other public purpose.
8. E.F. & Marian Mroczkowski (Alba Consulting Corporation) for variances of (1)' .67 ft in
height to permit a freestanding sign of 8.67 ft high; (2) 5 ft to permit a freestanding sign 0
ft from a street right-of~way jCourt St); and (3) 5 ft to permit freestanding sign 0 ft from a
side (east) property line to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1420 Court St,
Boulevard Heights, Blk K, part of Lots 8 & 9, zoned OL (Limited Office). SV 93-84 - Approved
#1; Approved #2 & #3 subject to the condition that by constructing a sign within the street
setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency
shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is
acquired by eminent domain, road widening or any other public purpose.
7. Roy M. Potvin, TRE (The Golf Depot) for a variance of 8 ft in height to permit a
(" '. freestanding sign of 28 ft in height to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 23197 US
.... Hwv 19, N, See 5-29-16, M&B 33.071, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-72 - Denied.
9. William J. ,& Bette J. Buckler (Huntington Homes) for a variance of 6 sq ft per sign to
permit two (2) 12 sq ft real estate signs to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2470
Parkstream Ave, Countrypark, Blk A, Lot 1, zoned RS 6 (Single Family Residential). SV 93-91
- Approved area variances of 6 square feet to allow two 12 square foot real estate signs'
subject 'to the condition that the variances expire and the signs be removed within one year
after this public hearing.
i!i ,~
""
3/21/94
3
, >
, "
C"
r""
.... \
10. Stavros & PanaQiota Demosthenis (Mr. Homemade) for variances of (1) 3.25 ft in height
to permit a freestanding sign of 23;25 ft; and (2) 18.5 sq ft to permit a fr,eestanding sign of
82.5 sq ft to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1765 Gulf-to-Bav Blvd. Suburb
Beautiful, 8lk 8, Lots 1, 2, 5 & 7, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-94 - Denied #1 &
#2.
11. Pinellas County for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 3.3 ft in height and 7 sq
ft in area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 305 Osceola Ave, S., See 16~29-,15,
M&B 13.04, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center Core). SV 93-97 - Approved.
,I
I
, !
I
I
1 2. E. Keith Rotz & Garv S. Rabe (Caryl's Natural Foods & Juice Bar) for variances (1) to
permit a freestanding sign of 12 ft in height and 15 sq ft; (2) to permit a freestanding sign of
10.58 ft in height and 15 sq ft; (3) of 6 ft to permit a freestanding sign 1 ft into right-of-way;
and (4) of 5.75 ft to permit a freestanding sign .75 ft into right-of-way to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 121 Ft. Harrison Ave N., Gould & Ewing's 1 st Add, Blk
1, part of Lot 3, and all of Lot 4, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Corel. SV 93-100 - Approved
a variance to allow the continuation of two existing freestanding signs, one which is 12 feet
high, 15 square feet in area, and encroaches 1 foot into the N. Ft. Harrison Avenue right of
way and the other which is 10.58 feet high. 15 square feet in area, and encroaches 0.75 feet
into the Watterson Avenue right of way, subject to the following conditions: 1) in the event
any regulated feature of either sign is changed, the encroachment into the right of way shall
be eliminated; 2) the signs shall be repaired within 60 days and then maintained in a good
state of repair; 3) the awning signs be repaired or removed within 60 days; and 4) that by
constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and
,t., applicant' agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or
\,..' removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain, road widening or
any other public purpose..
13. Anthonv Ales for a variance 01)4 ft to permit a freestanding sign 1 ft from street right-of-
way (Drew St) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2152 Drew 5t, Mosell Acres,
part of Lot 3, zoned CG (General Commercial), 5V 93w101 - Approved a setback variance of
4 feet to allow the existing freestanding sign to remain 1 foot from the Drew Street right of
way, subject to the following conditions: 1) that by constructing a sign within the street
setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency
shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is
acquired by ~minent domain, road widening or any other public purpose, and 2) that if the
"pplicant wishes to come back for rehearing they may do so.
I
14. American National Red Cross for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 11.5 ft in
height, 62 sq ft of sign area, and with a setback of 2 ft from street right-of-way (Court Stl
to' remain where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit nonconforming signage to remain
at 624 Court 5t, Court Square, Blk 12, Lots 13-16 together with Magnolia Park, Blk 12, Lot
2, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-102 - Approved a variance to allow the
continuation of a freestanding sign 8 feet high, 52.square feet in area, wit~ a setback of 2
feet from the Court Street right of way, subject to the condition that by constructing a sign
within the street setback pursuant to this variance. the owner and applicant agree that no
governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event
the property is acquired by eminent domain, road widening or any other public purpose.
c.,
3/21/94
4
.'
..... 4
j. ):
~T; >'
, '
'c " .
, '
. " ,;
, ,
, '
.r
15. H.H. Baskin. Sr. Rental ProDerties. Inc (Workbench, Inc) for a variance of 10 sq ft to
permit a total of 58 sq ft of attached signage to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
704 Court St, Magnolia Park, Blk 1.1, Lots 8 & 9 less railroad right-of-ways, zoned UC(C)
(Urban Center (Care). SV 93-106 - Approved an area variance of 7.9 square feet to allow the
continuation of two attached signs having a combined area of 55.9 square feet, subject to .
the condition that. in the event the sign is changed or replaced. it shall then be made to
conform.
,I
.1
I
16. Fortune Savinas Bank for a variance to permit 2 freestanding signs of 8 It in height and
48 sq ft in area where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit nonconforming signagc to
remain at 606 Chestnut si, Magnolia Park, Blk 13, Lots 16 & 17 less street and south 1/2 of
alley, and Lot 18, together with Court Square, Blk 13, Lots 1-3 and north %. of alley, zoned
UCIC) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-107 - Approved a variance to allow the continuation of
two existing freestanding signs, one sign being oriented to Chestnut Street and the other
oriented to Court Street. and both signs measuring 48 square feet in area and being lowered
to a height of 8 feet, subject to condition that the signs be lowered to a maximum height of
8 feet.
17. K.D. Sauder, TRE & K.D. Sauder. Trust for a variance of .3 sq ft to permit a 1'.8 sq It sign
, area ratio per building occupancy width to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 1969
Sunset Point Rd, See 1-29-15, Pinellas Groves Sub, part of Lots 1 & 2 less road, zoned CN
(Neighborhood Commercial). SV 93-109 . Approved a ratio variance of 0.3 square foot of
attached sign area per 1.0 linear foot of building width to allow a ratio of 1.8 square feet of
'sign area per 1.0 linear foot of building width, subject to condition that all attached signs on
(,i" , this property which are not part of this application be made to conform to city code and that
oil,,: an addendum requiring connformance with the sign code be added to all leases.
. 18. Waclaw & Zenana Niewiarowski (Sunset Point Wine & Liquor) for variances (1) to permit
an above roof sign; and (2) of 44 sq ft to permit a total of 108 sq ft of attached signage to
permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2516 Sunset Point Rd, Blackburn's Sub, part of
Lot 12, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-111 - Denied #1 & #2.
19. William G. Pontrello for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 4.42 It in height, 4sq
It in sign area, and with a setback of 6.7 It from a street right-of-way (Chestnut Street) to
remain where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit nonconforming signage to remain at
619 Chestnut St, Wallace's Add, part of Blk 5, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-112
- Approved a variance to allow the continuation of a freestanding sign 4.42 feet in height, 4
square feet in area, and 6.7 feet from the Chestnut Street right of way.
20. Direction regarding Request for Reconsideration of SV93-59 (Dickey/Rehabworks, Inc.) -
Denied.
21. (Cant. from 3/17/94) Stein Mart Lease - Continued to 3/23/94.
22: Environmental Survey - Phase 1 & 2 - Approved award to FGS, Inc.
Adjournment - 12:25 p.m.
l",,;
3/21/94
5
Also present:
i,
t:f:~~~:''';''/'::',~:.':<; :>,: ," .
"
'-,
. . .
. "
"
, .'
;. 'I' . , . I
~ ,,~ '
. ~.~. il.t~ I ~ ,~
". c.. f .... ~ ~ -" ~.' r ~.
r""",;
\ '
~'.
CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
March 21, 1 994
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in special session at City Hall,
Monday, March 21, 1994 at 9:04 a.m., with the following members present:
Rita Garvey
Arthur X. Deegan, II
Richard Fitzgerald
Sue A. Berfield
, Fred A. Thomas
Mayor/Commissioner
Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Elizabeth M. Deptula
M.A. Galbraith, Jr.
Scott Shuford
Susan Stephenson
, Interim City Manager
City Attorney
Central Permitting Director
Deputy City CierI<
Public Hearings were held concerning the following sign variance requests.
€'~i
ITEM A - (cont from 2-7-94) Valentinos Koumoulidis (Mr. Submarine) for variances of (1)
24.5 sq ft to permit 88.5 sq ft freestanding sign; and (2) 293.9 sq ft to permit a total of
357.9 sq ft of attached sign area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 101 0
Cleveland St, Sarah McMullen's Sub, 81k 3, part of lot 9, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center
East). SV 92-97 '
Commissioner Deegan moved to continue this item to April 19, 1994. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM B- (cont from 2-7~94) Richard O. Davison (Bav Area Neuro Muscular) for a variance
of 7 ft in sign height to permit a 27 ft freestanding sign to permit nonconforming signage
to remain at 1450 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Knollwood Replat, Blk 3, Lot 13, zoned CG (General
Commercial). SV 93-13
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to April 19, 1994. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Berfield moved to continue this item to April 19, 1994. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM C - (cont from 2-7-94) Arthur H. & Marv L. Bruno (Clearwater Mattress Co. Inc) for'
variances of (1) 294.46 sq ft to permit ~ total of 354.46 sq ft of attached signage area; .
and (2) one permanent window sign to permit 4 attached signs of the same type to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 1659 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Gulf-to~Bay Shopping Center,
Lots 3 & 4. zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV' 93M19
, I
L/
minSP03c.94
3/21 /94
1
" ,
l, ,'.J,:.,.:.
I, It :
or
'r
. . .~ ~ :
. ..~
r
ITEM 0 - (cant from 2~7-94) HeHka Properties (Clearwater Mattress Co, Inc) for variances
of (1) 15 ft to permit a freestanding sign 35 ft in height; (2) 2 above roof signs where
such signs are prohibited; (3) 12 sq ft to peimit 120,sq ft of attached sign area on north
face of business; and (4) 150 sq ft to permit 229.5 sq ft of attached sign area on east '
face of business to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 20258 US Hwy 19 N, ,See'
18-29-16, M&B 44.01, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). f3V 93-22
Commissioner Barfield moved to continue this item to April 19, 1994. The motion
was duly seconded and ca~ried un~nimously.
.t;l
ITEM E - (cant from 2-7-94) Curtis A & Marian Jackson (Clearwater Outboard) for
variances (1) of 209.6 sq ft to permit 273.6 sq ft of attached signage; (2) to permit a roof
sign where such signs are prohibited; and (3) of 4 attached signs to permit 9 attached
signs to penni~ nonconforming signage to remain at 603 Missouri Ave 5, Hibiscus
Gardens, Blk V, Lots 6, 7, 8, 9A, 98 & 10 less street, zoned CG (General Commercial).
SV 93-60
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the existing attached
signage to remain: 1 )'an area variance of 209.6 square feet from the permitted 64 square
,feet to allow a total area 0.1 273.6 square feet for the attached wall and roof signs; 2) a
variance to allow a roof sign where roof signs are prohibited; and 3) a variance of 4
attached signs from the permitted 5 attached signs to allow a total of 9 attached signs.
(c'
.,
.
The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Turner Street and
Missouri Avenue and is in the CG zoning district.
The applicant states this business sits in a depression in Missouri Avenue and has
no freestanding sign. While it is true this business,and the surroundina, area is located at ;',
the base of a decline in M'issouri Avenue, the elevation of this busines~ location is not,a '
condition unique to this property . Further, a freestanding sign, is perr,iitted at this '
property, and is an option the applicant may wish to consider. r '
The existence of these eight attached signs and one att,ached ro-::f ~l~n with a total
area of 273.6 square feet is not in character with the signs permitted for the commercial
businesses in the area. The granting of these variances will detract from the commercial
businesses that have conforming signs, permit an unfair advertising advantage to the
applicant; and negatively impact the overall appearance of, the, community.
Staff feels the applicant's variance requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
John Richter explained the application in detail. He pointed out that the canopy .
sign on the adjacent business violates the code as it is three dimensional and includes an
advertisement. Code Enforcement has been notified. He indicated the applicant is not
interested in erecting a free standing sign on the property even though a 20 foot high sign
could be seen over the canopy. He did not feel the depression in the road creates a unique
condition. '
. '
; ,
c'
min5P03c.94
3/21/94
2
'" .
€'''....
. ~.r
'.'
Mr. Peruche stated 'all window signs have been removed.
~. ", c;' '"
"
"
. ;)-
(':'
Robert Peruche, owner, stated since the name "Clearwater Outboard" does not
identify the 'merchandise he ,sells, he needs additional signage to identify those specific
products. He is compelled to display a Mercruiser sign and would prefer to retain at least
four signs identifying the products he sells; Elimination of some signs would be costly
because he receives a rebate for exhibiting some of them. He feels a pole sign on the
property would be inconvenient as he displays boats in front of his business and he can
maneuver them withou~ entering Missouri Avenue.
Mr. Richter stated if the pole sign were placed at the south end of the property near
the canopy, it should not interfere with maneuverability in front of the building.
Commissioner Thomas requested the applicant indicate on the photographs which
signs he was willing to eliminate. Mr~ Peruche complied.
Mr. Peruche indicated he would like to move his franchise sign from the roof and
place'it under the front eave, eliminate the Force Outboard sign, relocate the Mercruiser
sign to the north end 'of the overhang, remove Checkmate from the side of the building,
and keep the Mercury Outboard sign. The remainder of the signa!;,e will be removed or
paint~d over.
Mr. Richter stated with the elimination of the signs Mr. Peruche indicated on the
photographs, a variance of 89.7 square feet is needed for the area variance. There is no
need 'for a variance for a roof sign or the number of signs. Staff feels that free standing
signs create !TIore clutter than attached signs.
, '
Commissioner Berfield questioned whether additional signs were allowed since the
property is on a corner. Mr. Richter responded this is not the case.
, Commissioner Thomas moved to approve an area variance of 89.7 square ,feet to
permit a total of 153.7 square feet for the subject property subject to the following
conditions: 1) with the understanding there are no more than four (4) attached signs and
2) there will be no freestanding signs; and to deny the requested variance for a roof sign
for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1.8. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM F - (cant from 2-7-94) Marks & GiIIiss. lne/Marks Holding Co. lne (Ken Marks Ford)
for variances of (1) 37.5 sq ft in area to permit a freestanding sign of 149.5 sq ft; (2) 144
sq ft in area to permit an auxiliary sign of 200 sq ft; (3) 8 ft in height to permit an,auxiliary
sign of 20 ft in height; and (4) 18ft in distance to permit an auxiliary sign with a distance
of 282 ft from the primary sign to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 24791 &
24825 US Hwy 19 N, Ken Marks Ford, Blk A, Lot 1 ,together with Ken Marks Ford 1 st Add
Sub, Lot 1, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-65 '
.' ,
1
!'
Commissioner Thomas moved to continue this item to April 19, 1994. The motion
was duly secol")ded and carried unanimously.
(~.,
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
3
,
,:
~ j .
, ,
, '
~~
,
ITEM 'G'- (cont from 3-7-94) Manuel & Evangeline Kastrenakes (Pinellas Rent A'Car. Inc)
for variances of (1) 16 ft to permit a 36 ft high' freestanding sign; (2) 64.8 sq ft to permit
a 176.8 sq ft freestanding sign to remain; and (3) to permit a second allowable
freestanding sign to be oriented to same street as primary freestanding sign to permit
nonco'nforming signage to remain at 19206 US Hwy 19 N, Sec 19-29-16, M&B 14.06,
zoned CH' (Highway Commercial), SV 93-16
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the continuation of two
freestanding signs oriented to US Hwy 19 N: 1) an'area variance of 64.8 square feet from
the permitted 112 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with a total area of 176.8
square feet; .2) a height variance of 16 feet from the permitted 20 feet to allow a
freestanding sign with a total height of 36 feet; and 3) a variance to permit a second
freestanding sign oriented to US Hwy 19 N.
The subject property is located on the northwest corner of US Hwy 19N and Ham
Boulevard and is in the CH zoning district.'
(,...,
, "
The subject property is developed with two freestanding signs; both are oriented to
US Hwy 19 N.' Because the property fronts on'two major thoroughfares, US Hwy 19 N
and Ham Boulevard, two fre~standing signs may be placed on the property, one oriented
to ,each major thoroughfare. This property does not qualify for two sign on US Hwy 19 N.
The property, less than one acre, is rather small in size compared to other US Hwy 19 N
properties. Also, the 'frontage of about 20.0 feet on US Hwy 19 N is small by highway
'standards. Allowing two signs on US Hwy 19 N on a property of this size and frontage
would establish an undesirable precedent.
"
, The existence of two freestanding signs oriented to US Hwy 1 9 N with a combined
area of 226 square feet is not in character with signage permitted for other businesses or
properties in the area. Granting these variances will detract from properties with
conforming signs, permit an unfair advertising advantage to this applicant, and negatively
impact the appearance' of the community.
, '
\
-I'
, j
Staff feels the applicantfs requests do not meet the standards for variance'
approval.
C"
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
4
'I'
I . . ~..
:f;.:\ '. - '.
"
,J q
,.
II
. ,
,J
/, .
1-" .
1 '
"
" .
"I- '
i.
e:~
. .
Mr. Richter explained the application in detail and noted the applicant is entitled to
two signs, one fronting each road, because the property is located on two major
thoroughfares. The sign code was designed to enhance traffic safety.
,Michael Boutzoukas, attorney representing the applicant, stated they are requesting
an i'ncrease in area for the taller sign on the southern portion of the property which will
measure 1 20 square feet in area and they are requesting the sign be permitted to remain
30 feet high. The second sign will contain 50 square feet of area and will need a variance
of 8 feet in height to allow it to be 20 feet high instead of 12 feet.
I
..,
I
J
!
'l
l.
\
'Mr. Boutzoukas stated this business provides a service to tourists and, due to the
flatness of the road in this area, signs are not easily seen. The sign will be difficult to see
at a height of 20 feet. He noted two poles erected by Florida Power somewhat obstruct
the sign from the view of motorists approaching southbound on US Hwy 19 N.
Commissioner Thomas questioned if the auto dealership to the north 'is located in
the County, or City. Mr. Richter responded the dealership is in tl;1e City and requests for
variances to their signage are scheduled to be heard at the April 19, 1994 meeting.
Commissioner Thomas questioned historic precedent in order to ensure that this
case is treated fairly. .
I,
I
[
, f
Mr. Richter noted variances of two or three feet are typically considered minimum.
4":,
'If.;~.
Commissioner Thomas questioned how the second sign can qualify as a Ham
Boulevard sign and if a 45 degree angle would "satisfy this requirement.
Mr. Richter responded tl1at 45 degrees is generally the cut off point. The existing
sign must be oriented more toward Ham than, it presently is. In response to a question,
Mr. Richter noted tl1at both signs may be 112 square feet in area. Commissioner Thomas
noted the smaller sign on US Hwy 19 N is a tradeoff for the larger sign on Ham.
Mr. Richter explained it will be necessary to relocate the sign closer to Ham
Boulevard for it to be legal.' Merely angling the sign will not suffice.
Discussion ensued regarding permitted signage and where it can be located.
~ I~
Mr. Shuford suggested the Commission grant a variance of eight square feet to
permit a 120 square foot sign subject to the second freestanding sign being oriented
toward Ham Boulevard with a square footage of 50 square feet.
(. '
rninSP03c.94
3/21/94
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a variance of 8 square feet to permit a
1 20 square foot freestanding sign subject to tile condition that the second freestanding
sign on the property be oriented to Ham Boulevard, not exceeding a height of 20 fee~ and
an area of 50 square feet for the subject pr.operty for meeting Section 45.24, 'Standards.
for Approval. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
5
.~. ~'..,.' :.:: :~":::.,,'::':, .... ',:;,<,,:'< .~'~ '..:. '.":'.:', ,,:,,:,:,;,:,: .:' ':,',':",,s,,\:,' ',:0::;.,:':"", :::'
~ } ~ ..u....,~.~.,:4'~/...q.. \-," 'J
,
Jo ~ . .
.' ,
:." ,"
~.}: ~ '.
"":,', ! L .L
I .' I
c~
ITEM H - (cont from 3-7-941 True Realtv Com (Tovs uRu UsI for a variance of 14.6 ft in
height to permit a freestanding sign of 37.6 ft in height to permit nonconforming signage
to remain at 26286 US Hwy 19 N, Village at Countryside, Parcel 4 Replat, Lot 2 less 'road
on east, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-95
The applicant is requesting the following variance to permit the existing
freestanding sign to remain: a height variance of 14.6 feet from the permitted 23 feet to
allow a sign 37.6 feet high.
The subject property is located on the west side of US Hwy 19 N, south of
Countryside' Boulevard, and is in the CC zoning district.
The applicant indicates the variance is requested due to the roadway construction
on Us Hwy 19 N in front of this property. That is, an overpass being constructed for the
Countryside Boulevard intersection causes the roadway to be at a higher elevation than
would be the case if there is no overpass.
Staff feels the applicant's variance request does not meet the standards for
variance approval. '
Mr. Shuford reported that the applicant is willing to relocate Geoffrey" the giraffe"
on the sign but would still be requesting a variance to allow the sign to be 30 feet high. In,
order to allow ,driveway access, the sign is set back further tha'n required. If Geoffrey .
were placed on the east side of the sign, he would be more visible.
Butch Jackson, representing the applicant, stated the applicant has completed line
site studies regarding this sign and feels the sign alone will not be an identifying fact,or.
When vehicles head south on the frontage road, trees and clutter block the view of the ,
sign. ThE1' existing height provides good visibility. He noted they require a height variance
of seven feet and will relocate Geoffrey below the rectangular portion of the sign, which is
not proposed to be changed.
'C".
,
..
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
6'
, \
"
,~:y ,>. {, I ': ~ . i.
~. c'" ~ .
> "
. l.'\.
"
,
I
\ :,. c ~
if"'.
.',J
~~ t. ~ ". . .
. .
. ~ . ",
. "
" ,
r'l
"
Commissioner Thomas inquired if the applicant would prefer to relocate Geoffrey
below the rectangle and have a sign 20 feet high or leave Geoffrey at the top so it remains
similar to other Toys ItRIt Us signs.
Mr. Jackson indicated his client would prefer Geoffrey in the box rather'than lower
the height of the rectangular portion of the sign.
Commissioner Thomas noted Geoffrey, sticking up at the top of the sign, is the
symbol for Toys "RIt Us. He said only a four and a half foot variance would be required if
the boX' portion of the sign were reduced to 20 feet and Geoffrey returned to his traditional
location. "
Mr. Jackson noted if Geoffrey is relocated anywhere on the rectangle other than its
present location, structural changes will be required.
The Mayor noted Commissioner Thomas' suggested compromise was reasonable.
Commissioner' Thomas moved to approve a variance of 4.5 feet in height to allow
the rectangular portion of the sign to be at a height of 20 feet with Geoffrey (7.5 ft tall)
being' placed ,at the top for ,the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for
Approval. The motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken; Mayor Garvey and
Commissioners Fitzgerald. Deegan and Thomas voted IIAye." Commission'er Berfield voted
"Nay." Motion carried.
('"
, ,
.....T
ITEM #1 - Charles J. & Joyce M. Eufemia (Charlies Italian American Restaurant) for
variances of (1) 26 sq ft to permit a freestanding sign of 90 sq ft; and (2) 5 ft to permit a
freestanding sign 0 ft from street right-of-way (Cleveland St) to permit nonconforming
signage to remain at 1242 Cleveland St, Padgett's Estates Sub bf Lots 20-22, Lot 3. and
part of Lots 2 & 4, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center (East). SV 92-82
The applicant req~ests the following variances to permit the existing freestanding
sign to remain, but with a lesser area: 1) an area variance of 26 square feet from the
permitted 64 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with an area of 90 square feet"and
2) a setback variance of 5 feet from the required 5 foot setback to allow a freestanding
sign zero feet from the Cleveland Street right,of way.
The subject' property is located on the northwest corner of Cleveland Street and
Lincoln Avenue, and is in the UC(E) zoning district. The current sign area is 136 square
feet; the proposfld area is 90 square feet.
The applicant indicates the variances are requested because the existing 136
square foot sign pre-dates current code requirements. Staff agrees extensive site
modifications must occur in order to relocate the sign to meet the setback requirement,
including the loss of a parking space. Consequently, it is staff's position that strict
enforcement of the setbac~ requirement would be inappropriate. However, staff does not
c~
minSP03c.94
. 3/21/94
7
; '..
i ,
. ,
, ,
." ~ i ; I.
. ,', ~ { ,0 "
'~
4..' .
find any condition unique to this property to allow a sign larger than is allowed for other
businesses in this zone. Many other oversized signs in the City that pre-dated current area
limitations have been modified to conform to current standards. To allow this sign a
greater area than is permitted by code would constitute a special privilege not available to
other business owners.
A 90 square foot sign is not in character with the signage permitted for the
surrounding commercial areas and will divert attention from nearby businesses. The
granting of the requested area variance will detract from properties that have conforming
signs and will negatively affect the appearance of the community.
,
Staff feels the requested area variance does not meet the standards for variance .
approval.
John Richter explained the application and stated this sign predates the sign code.
Staff agrees that extensive sight relocation would be necessary and a parking space would
be eliminated if the setback variance is not approved. Staff feels. however, that there is
no justification for the increased area.
(,,:\
, ,
'"
Don McFarland, Attorney representing the' applicant, stated his client had performed
a survey several years ago and asked .why individuals visited his business. Many indicated
they stopped because they noticed the restaurant when driving by. He suggested this,
proves the sign is very important. His client feels the rTI'essage board has added to the
clientele. If tne middle portion of the message board were removed, the wording could be
redone but would still require a 26 square foot variance.
Commissioner Thomas asked how frequently the message board is changed.
Charles Eufemia, owner, stated one portion of the board is changed when help is
needed and the other portion is changed about once a month. In response to a question
on the importance of the message board, Mr. Eufemia replied he felt it was essential. It is
important for people to know they have been open since 1955.
The Mayor noted she did not feel the area variance was justified but agreed the
location was important.
Discussion ensued regarding the size of one panel. It was noted the panel could be
reduced in size. It was pointed out that the Commission is not regulating the message
contained on the sign. .
Mr. McFarland inquired about'the possibility of withdrawing the area variance
reques~ and asked if he would be, precluded from returning for a variance if the applicant
found the impact too negative. Upon assurance that the area variance could be requested
at a 'later time, he withdrew the area variance request.
"1
minSP03c. 94.
3/21/~4
8
ITEM #2 - Branch Sunset Associates Ltd (Sunset Point Shoppinq Center) for variances of
(1) 25 ft in height to permit a 45 ft high freestanding sign (US 1-9 frontage), (2) 91.5 sq ft
freestanding sign to permit 241.5 sq ft of sign area (US 19); (3) 25 ft in height to permit a
45 ft high freestanding sign (Sunset Point Rd frontage); and (4) 91 .5 sq ft of freestanding
sign area to permit a 241.5 sq ft freestanding sign (Sunset Point Rd) to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 23654-23698 US Hwy 19 N, See 6.29-16, M&Bs
41.01, 41.02, 41.04,41.05 & 41.06, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-43
. ~ .~. or
" ,'.;c
i; ',"
c
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a setback variance of 5 feet as this
request meets the standards subject to the following conditions: 1) the sign area be made
to comply with code, 2) that by constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to
',this variance, the owner an'd applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable
for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by
eminent domain, road widening or any other public purpo,se, and 3) if area variance is
needed the applicant may reapply for same within six months at a $50 fee. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
1"."
. ~.~
The applicant is requesting the following variances to pormit the existing
freestanding signs to remain: 1) a height variance of 25 feet from the permitted 20 feet to
allow a freestanding sign on US Hwy 19 N with a height of 45 feet; 2) an area variance of
91.5 square feet from the permitted 150 square feet to allow a freestanding sign on US
Hwy 19 N with an area of 241.5 square feet; 3) a height variance of 25 feet from the
permitted 20 feet to allow a freestanding sign on Sunset Point Road with a height of 45
feet; and 4) an area variance of 91.5 square feet from the permitted 150 square feet to
allow a freestanding sign on Sunset Point Road with an ,area of 241.5 square feet.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of US Hwy 19 Nand
Sunset Point Road, and is in the CC zoning district.
,!
, j
The applicant states this property has a unique hardship in that the buildings are.
located approximately 1,000 feet from US Hwy 19 N which causes the attached building
signs to be illegible from the roadway and makes the tenants of this center rely on the
freestanding sign for identification.
, ,
Staff research indicates the builc1ings are indeed located a great distance from US
Hwy 19 N. The front of the main building paralleling the west property line is 740 feet
from the US Hwy 19 N right of way. However, the sign regulations allow for larger signs
on buildings located substantial distances from the right of way. The sign bonus
provisions allow the size to more than double at the distances that exist here. Staff finds
there is no condition unique to this property that warrants different treatment from other
properties in this zone. Further, variances of this magnitude ar~ not considered minimal.
I
The existence 0 f these 45 foot high, 241.5 square foot signs is not in character
with the signage permitted for the surrounding commercial areas and diverts attention
from those land uses. The granting of these variances will detract from the surrounding
businesses that have conforming signs and negatively affect the appearance of the
community.
l,
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
9
.€ c.~
i,/...., .'
I
. .j .-1'
>\J':~:~:'" '.
il' .\< .
,
1<.<
\ ".'
. "".
t', .
, : .~, .
r'
i '
..' :t
~
\.~.' :
Staff feels the applicant's variance requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application. Neither the applicant nor their representative
was present for this item..
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the requested variances for the subject
property ,for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1 ~B. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously. '
,;
ITEM #3 - Searstown Partners/Sears Roebuck & Co. (Georqia Ootical) for a variance of
6.75 sq ft to permit 26.25 sq ft of attached signage to permit nonconforming signage to'
remain at 1269 Missouri Ave, S, E.F. Hanousek's Sub, Lots 11 & 12, zoned CG (Goneral
Commercial). SV 93-52
I.
The applicant is requesting, the following variance to allow the existing attached
sign to remain: an area variance of 6.75 square feet from the permitted 19.5 square feet
to allow an'attached sign with an area of 26:25 square feet. The maximum area is based
upon 1.5 square feet permitted per 1.0 linear foot of building frontage.. This building ha's
13.33 feet of frontage.
,]
I
'The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Lakeview Road and
Missouri Avenue, and is in the CC zoning district. .
,,'.(>
, 'I
This store is located in the northeast corner of the shopping center. The location
provides limited visibility from the street and parking lot. Furthermore, the store !:las a
small width of only 13 feet, and is thereby allowed only 19.5 square feet of sign area.
. The limited visibility of the location and the small store front create a unique condition, and
a hardship, for this business. This request is the minimum needed to 'overcome the
hardship.
Commercial and residential uses surround th~ Searstown property. This 26.25
'square foot sign is in character with the signage permitted for the nearby businesses. The
granting of this variance will not adversely affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the' applicant's request meets all of the standards for variance approval.
I,
John Richter explained the application and noted that this business is located in the
"Lit of the shopping center. Because it is only 13 feet, wide, they are only permitted a sign
19 1/2 square feet in area. Staff feels this represents justification for granting the .
variances. .
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present for this item.
(>
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
10
" ,
, .
"
"
; : ~
"
r'
"
'..
f ,
d
: ,.
. . , ,'-, ~
("\
. ,
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve an area variance of 6.75 square feet for
the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The:
motion was duly,seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM 1/4 - McDonald's Corooration/Franchise Realtv Interstate (McDonald's) for a variance
of 2.1 ft to permit a 8.1 ft drive-through menu sign to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 539 Missouri Ave, S, Hibiscus Gardens. all of Blk T. zoned CG (General '
Commercial). SV 93-55
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow the continuation of the
drive-through menu sign: a height variance of 2.1 feet from the permitted 6 feet to allow
a menu sign with a height of 8.1 feet.
The subject property is located on the east side of Missouri Avenue, bounded on
the north by Rogers Street and the south by Turner Street, and is in the CG 7.oning district.
, . '
This sign does not adversely affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood or City. The
sign is oriented to the drive-through lane on the east side of the building. A 6 foot high
stockade fence' parallels the east property fine, effectively screening the view of the sign
from the properties to the east.
In this case, the benefit to the public that would result from strict enforcement of'
the sign code would not outweigh the cost to the applicant to modify the sign to make it
conform.
('"
.. .' .' ~
. J
..' '
This 8.1 foot high menu sign does not compete with signs on nearby properties and
will not detract tram the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all of the standards for variance approval.
Scott Shuford explained the application.
Robert L. Mott, representing the applicant, noted that similar variances were
approved for the 'McDonald's on Sunset Point and US Hwy 19 N.
Commissioner Berfield inquired how the situation w,as handled at the McDonald's
on Gulf to Bay. Mr. Shuford responded they were required to take some additional things
off the top but that one faced Gulf to Bay Boulevard and this one is not on the street and
'does not have the same impact.
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a height variance of 2.1 feet for the
subject property for meeting Section 45:24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to
the condition that an opaque fence and/or landscaping be maintained at a height of 6 feet
along the east property line. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
6" ,.-.;
,.
minSP03c.94
.3/21/94
11
')
I
j'
I,
"
~'.~ f.:~'/~.
",
, . ,
~~ J ,).
" ,l,
~ . ~ , .
T-.<.'
. .!'"
t ('.
(---...
ITEM #5 - University High Eauitv Real Estate Fund/National Ooerating, L.P. (Shell Oil) for a
variance of 1. freestanding sign of 146 sq ft and 30 ft in height to permit a. second
freestanding sig'n to remain to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 26998 US Hwy ,
19 N, Sec 30-28-' 6, M&8 31.04, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93-63 .
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow replacement of the
freestanding sign for the Shell Service Station: one freestanding sign with an area of 146
square' feet and a height of 30 feet to permit a second freestanding sign. '
The subject property is located on the west s,ipe of US Hwy 19 N, south of
S.R.580, and is in the CC zoning district. The property is developed with the Countryside
Plaza shopping center, a Shell Service Station, and a Long John Silver restaurant.
There are presently three freestanding signs on the property, one for each of the
aforementioned uses. However, since all the uses are located on a single property, only
one primary freestanding sign is permitted along US Hwy 19 N. The property has in
excess of 500 feet of frontage on US Hwy 19 N thereby qualifying for an auxiliary sign.
The auxiliary sign would be permitted an area of 75 square feet and a height of 16 feet.
However, it should be noted that US I:'iwy 19 N is elevated in this location, and a 16 foot
high auxiliary sign could not be viewed from the roadway,
The third freestanding sign on this proporty, the Long John Silver sign, is the
. subject of a separate variance application and, as such, is being treated separately from.
this application. '
, t~",
. ,j
>j ~
The Shell Service Station functions as a use independent of the nearby shopping
center and restaurant. By all outward appearances, the Shell station appears to be an
outparceJ of the shopping center. Most outparcels in the City have freestanding signs. It
is reasonable that motorists on US Hwy 19 N be able to identify the existence of this
service station. The auxiliary sign allowed for the property will not suffice to identify 'the
service station be'cause of the 16 foot height limit. Therefore, it is apparent that some
reHef is in order for this applicant. '
The code allows signs along elevated roadways to extend 10 feet above the crown
of the road measured perpendicular from the roadway to the sign location. In this case,
the crown of the road is 18 feet above the elevation of the ground at the base of the sign.
Consequently, the variance request for a30 foot high sign is not a minimum variance
because a 28 foot high sign would adequately serve to identify this use.
I
!
The freestanding sign size allowed with commercial centers, 150 square feet, is the
, largest size allowed in the City. This zone is reserved for large-scale shopping centers.
The size and scale of ' the Shell station is not comparable to the size and scale of large-
scale shopping centers. It is staff.'s position~ therefore, the 146' square foot sign
requested for the station is not a minif,Tlum variance. The station can be more
l>
minSP03c.94
3/21 (94
12
. ,
~ J'. ", .
~{//:: .:: ,::,"
,
" '
.... ~ ~
~ ~ .
, .,
;" ,"
!...,;.....
': ~.:
."<<..
,l ......., . ,
..',. ,..i;.
.'. .
c
appropriately likened to other service stations on US Hwy 19 N, most of which are
assigned CH zoning. Under CH zoning, 112 square feet is the maximum area allowable.' It
is staff's position that a 112 square foot sign would be in keeping with the scale of the
development and would enable identification of this business 'to motorists on US Hwy 19
N. .
In conclusion, staff feels the applicant's request does not meet the standards for
variance approval. However, a 112 square foot sign, with a height not exceeding 10 feet
above the crown of the roadway measured perpendicular from the roadway to the sign '
location, would be keeping with the character of the signage permitted for the surrounding
commercial areas. A sign of this size and height would .not adversely affect the
appearance of the community.
John Richter explained the application noting the auxiliary sign should be of lower
height and include less area than the shopping center sign. The roadway is elevated in
this area and a 16 foot height is not sufficient for a sign, to be seen. The service station
functions independently of the shopping center and has an unusual zoning classification.
Staff feels a 1.12 square foot sign at a height of 28 feet is adequate and minimal. They
recommend denial of the 146 square foot sign at a height of 30 feet. '
. , ,
'Todd Pressman, representing the applicant, agreed the variance originally filed was
excessive and noted staff had done a good job in reaching a compromise. He felt their
'suggestions were fair and equitable.
eM,";,
. '
Commissioner Deegan inquired if the service station is located on an outparcel of
the shopping center and Mr. Richt~r responded it depends on how "outparcel" is defined.
, qiscussion ensued regarding how the parcel for the Home Shopping Network on US
Hwy 19 N was treated. In that case, there was no road frontage and it did not give the
appearance of being an outparcel and staff felt it should be identified with the main sig,n
for the center.
Mr. Shuford noted that treating the. service station as if it had Highway Commercial
zoning is reasonable.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to deny the requested variance but to approve q
variance of one freestanding sign with an area of, 11 2 square feet and a height of 1 0 feet
above the crown of the roadway measured perpendicular from the roadway to the location
'of the sign (a height of approximately 28 feet) to permit a second freestanding sign for the
subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to
the following conditions: 1) no auxiliary sign be nla'ced on this property, and 2) the sign
permit be procured within 60 days of this public hearing. The motion was duly,seconded
and 'carried unanimously. .
("
minSP03c.94
3/21 /94
13
, '
, ,
"
, '
_' '.'II,e
, '
D
\"
J >
ITEM #6 - University Hioh 'Eauitv Real Estate Fund/National Ooerating. L.P. CLona John
Silver's) for a variance of 1 freestanding sign to permit an additional such sign, with 92 sq
ft of sign area, a height of 20 ft above the roadway and a setback of 3 ft from street right
o~ way (US Hwy 19 N) to permit nonconforming sign age to remain at 269B8 US Hwy 19
N, See 30-28-16, M&B 31.04, zoned CC (Commercial Center). SV 93..79
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow the Long John Silver
restaurant sign to remain with a greater height than currently exists: one freestanding sign
, with an area of 92 square feet, a height of 20 feet above the crown of the roadway, and a
setback of 3 feet to permit an additional freestanding sign on property where one
freestanding sign is allowed.
The subject property is located on the west side of US Hwy 19 N, south of
SR 580, and is in the CC zoning district. The property is developed with the Countryside
Plaza shopping center, a Shell Service Station, and a Long John Silver restaurant.
,',
There are presently three freestanding signs on the property, one for each ,of the
aforementioned uses. However, since all the uses are located on a single property, only
one primary freestanding sign is permitted along US Hwy 19 N. The property has in
excess of 500 feet of frontage on US Hwy 19 N thereby qualifying for an auxiliary sign.
The auxiliary sign would be permitted an area of 75 square feet and. a height of 16 feet.
However, it should be noted that US Hwy 19 N is elevated in this location, and a 16 foot
high auxiliary sign could not be viewed from the roadway.
(~.',
, ;
" !:
u,...
The third freestanding sign on this property, the Shell service station sign, is the'
subject of a separate variance application and as such is being treated separately from this
application.
The Long John Silver restaurant functions as a use independent of the nearby
shopping center and service station. By all outward appearances, the Long John Silver
restaurant appears to be an outparcel of'the shopping center. Most outparcels in the City
, have freestanding signs. It is reasonable that motorists on US Hwy 19 N be able to
idEmtify the existence of this restaurant. The auxiliary sign allowed for the property will
not SUffiC3 to identify the service station because of the 16 foot height limit. Therefore, it
is apparent that some relief is in order for this applicant.
The code allows signs along elevated roadways to extend 10 feet above the crown
of the road measured perpendicular from the roadway to the sign location. In this case,
the crown of the road is 14 feet above the elevation of th3 ground at the base of the sign.
. Accordingly, the sign height permitted by code is 24 feet. The existing sign is 27 feet
high. In eff!3ct, the variance request is to allow the sign to be elevated an additional 7
. feet. rather'than enforcing the code and thereby requiring the sign to be lowered 3 feet.
Staff does not find any condition unique for this property to warrant the additional height.
This property is affected in the same manner as other properties that front elevated
roadways. To grant additional, height for this sign would confer a special privilege on this
applicant that is not available to similarly situated property owners.
, . J
~l .
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
14
, ,
::': i,L:..
,.
..' ~ 'I j
1
, ,
I: <
"
> ".
" '
, I
r
Staff regards the request for 92 square feet of sign to be a minimum' variance.
Most commercial properties on US Hwy 19 ,N developed with restaurants or other'
businesses comparable to the scale of the Long John Silver restaurant are assigned, CH
zoning. Under CH zoning, 112 square feet is the maximum freestanding sign area
permitted. It is staff's position that the requested 92 square foot sign is in keeping with
the scale of this development and will enable identification of this business to motorists on
US Hwy 19 N. '
Re'garding the sign setback, staff regards the existing 1 foot setback to be a
minimum variance. The benefit that would be derived by the public if the sign was
relocated 2 additional feet away from the US Hwy 19 N right of way would pale in
comparison to the relocation cost to the applicant.
In conclusion, staff feels the applicant's request does not meet the standards for
variance approv'al. However, a 92 square foot sign, positioned 1 foot from the right of
way, with a height not exceeding 10 feet above the crown of the roadway (a height of
approximately 24 feet) will adequately serve to identify this use, qualify as a minimum
variance and be in keeping with the character with the signage permitted for the
surrounding commercial areas. A sign of this size and height would not adversely affect
the appearance of the community.
Scott Shuford explained the application.
Harry Cline, Attorney representing the applicant, stated he concurred with staff's
t~", ~ recommen,dation. He noted the previous applicant, the neighbor t~ the north" has a 'sign
\i.., 27 feet tall. He questioned why it would be necessary for his client to reduce the height
of his sign by three feet when the sign on the adjoining property is three feet taller.
Commissioner Deegan moved to deny the requested variance but to approve a
variance of one freestanding sign with an area of 92 square feet, a height of 10 feet abo~e
the crown of the roadway, and a setback of 3 feet, to permit an additional freestanding
sign for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-
8, subject to the following conditions: 1) no auxiliary sign be placed on this property; 2)
the sign permit be procured within 60 days of this public hearing; and 3) tliat by
constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and
applicant agree that no governmental agency shall.be liable for the cost of relocating or
removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent domain, road widening ,
or any other public purpo~e. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #7 - Rov M. Potvin. TRE (The Golf Depot) for a variance' of 8 ft in height to permit a
freestanding sign of 28 ft in height,to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 23197
US Hwy 19 N, See 5-29-16, M&B 33.071, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). SV 93-72
,
. The applicant is requesting.a height variance of B feet from the permitted 20 feet to
allow the continuation of a freestanding sign 28 feet high.
, .
i
L/
minSP03c.94 '
3/21/94
15
b. .
'. OJ.
. '.; ~,'.
"
,:';',r,::~>;:' ,';'
;. .'
,
.:: . ~ \. '
, ..,'~. .
. I,.
...
t'
The subject:property is located on the east side of US Hwy 19 N, north of SR 590,
and is in the CH zoning district.
This sign is small and tall. It is half the area allowed by.code and 40% higher than
permitted.
The application does not contain information identifying any unique condition
applicable to this property and, upon viewing and analyzing the property, staff does not
find the existence of any such condition. Though the sign is smaller than allowed by code,
this is not cause for granting a height variance as tho applicant can place a larger sign, if
so desired.
The existence of this 28 foot high sign is not in character with the signage
permitted for the surrounding businesses and diverts attention from those uses. The
granting of this variance will detract from the properties that have conforming signs and
will negatively affect the, appearance of the community.
John Richter explained the application and described the sign as small and tall.
Staff fee,ls there is no unique condition regarding this property and recommends denial of ' .
the height request.
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present for this item.
Commissioner Deegan inquired about the dispute regarding the logo and indicated
C';' they should not make the applicant change the sign twice if the dispute has not yet been
.... ' resolved. .
Mr. Shuford noted the applicant was contacted and notified of the meeting. He
suggested without a representative being present to explain the status of the dispute
regarding the logo,. the Commission should act as they see fit.
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny the requested 8 foot height variance for the
subject property for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The
. motion was duly s'econded and carried unanimously. '
Meeting recessed 'from 11 :00 until 11 :12 a.m.
ITEM #8 - E.F. & M'orian Mroczkowski (Alba ConsultinQ Corporationl for variances of (1)
.67ft in height to permit a freestanding sign of 8.67 ft high; (2) 5 ft to permit a
freestanding sign 0 ft from a street 'right-of-way (Court St); and (3) 5 ft to permit
freestanding sign 0 ft from a side (east) property line to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 1420 Court St, Boulevard Heights, 81k K, part of Lots 8 &' 9, zoned OL ,Limited
Office). SV93-84
, The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing
freestanding sign to remaln: 1) a height variance of 0.67 feet from the permitted 8 feet to
allow a freestanding sign 8.67 feet high; 2) a setback variance of 5 feet from the required
, ~;
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
16
"
. '
, ,
, ,
",<.-,
"
"
, '
, ,
T, :- . ~ . c
"
. ~.~..
, ,
!,
('
, ,
5 foot setback to allow' a freestanding sign zero feet from the Court Street right of way;
and 3) a setback variance of 5 feet from the required 5 foot setback to allow a
freestanding sign zero feet from tlie east side property line.
The subject property is 10cBted on the north side of Court Streett east of Hillcrest
Avenue, and is in the OL zoning district.
The "front yardt1 of this small office property is almost entiroly paved parking. The
sign is situated on the east property line in a grassy area just large enough to
accommodate the sign.
In the event the sign is required to be moved to comply with setbacks, an
unnecessary hardship will be imposed upon the applicant. If the sign is relocated from the
side property line, it will eliminate a parking space. If the sign is relocated from Court
Streett reduced visibility will result when vehicles occupy existing parking spaces to the
east and west of the sign. .
("~'
,
The 0.67 feet height variance request is minimal. It represents an 8% departure
from the code. It is quite unlikely an observer would discern this sign is any higher than
other conforming signs in the area. Under any circumstance, the slight overage in height
will not cause a negative affect on n'earby properties. The height variance is eligible for
consideration as a minor variance under the City/s newly adopted ordinance, but since this
application was accepted prior to the adoption of the ordinance, and there are other "non-
. minortl variances involved, staff recommends Commission consideration of the height
variance.
The existence of this 8.67 foot high, 10 square foot sign is in keeping with the
character of signage permitted for the surrounding office uses. The granting of these
variances will not detract from businesses that have conforming signs and will not
adversely affect the appearance of the neighborhood or the City.
Scott Shuford explained the application and stated staff recommends approval of
the request as they feel relocation of the sign would present a hardship.
Mr. Atanasio, representing the applicant, was present but made no comments.
I
!
I
, j
!
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a height variance of 0.67 feet, a
setback variance of 5 feet from the Court Street right of way and a setback variance of 5
feet from the east side property line for the s'ubject property for meeting Section 45.24/
Standards for Approval, items 1 ~8, subject to the following condition regarding both
setback variances: that by constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant to this
. variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be liable for the
cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by eminent
,domain, road widening or any other public purpose. The motion was duly seconded and,
carried unanimously.
(.i,
minSP03c.94
3/21 /94
17
, '
.'
.' . .
..."
~ ,>:.':"....' ~' , ," "," ,'. , '
"
, ' ,
.
,
0,
, ,
, .
, '
'"
"
,.
. ~- ~, !
~
: I.
\I
ITEM #9 - William J. & Bette J. Buckler (HuntinQton Homes) for a'variance of 6 sq ft per
sign to perinit two (2) 1 2 sq ft real estate signs to permit nonconforming signage to '
remain at 2470 Parkstream Ave, Countrypark, Blk A, Lot 1, zoned RS 6 (Single Family
'Residential). SV 93.91
The applicant is requesting the following variances to permit the two existing signs
to remain: area variances of 6 square feet from the nermitted 6 square feet to allow two
1 2 square foot real estate signs.
< "
, ;
" .
~~
"
,";'
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Enterprise Road and,
Parkstream Avenue, and is in the RS-6 zoning district.
, "
: '
The two signs are used to identify the existing home on this property as a model
center for the subdivision. The applicant indicates the variance is needed for a temporary
period, estimated at one year. Staff observes the signs are attractively designed and
constructed. . '
1'1 ::
The existence of these two real estate signs, each having an area of 12 square
feet, does not detract from the appearance of the residential neighborhood or the
community .
, ,
,Staff feels the applicant/s requests meet all of the standards for variance approval.
.(" ;'.
. '
,,;,
John Richter explained the application noting that the variances are needed
temporarily for one year. The signs are' attractive. '
Bill O'Neill, representing the applicant, was present.
Commissioner Deegan questioned how the request met standards two and three.
He expressed no opposition to the variance but questioned whether the request justifies
those standards. He suggested the code may need to be amended to indicate that this
type of situation is permitted.
Mr. Richter agreed that it is difficult to justify the variances with regard to criteria
two and three but felt the request was minimal.
i
\
Scott Shuford stated that staff will be looking at similar situations and some
changes will be made to the sign code based on decisions reached by the Commission
during these sign variance hearings. It is projected these changes will be brought forth in
the middle of the year. '
Commissioner Thomas, moved to approve area variances of 6 square feet to allow '
two 12 square foot real estate signs for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24,
Standards for Approval, items 1-8/ sl.Jbject to the condition that the variances expire and
the signs be removed within, one year after this public hearing. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
L
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
18
t,
" ,
, ,
, .
!.....'I
"
"
'c
, '
J;
,.
(:~
, , ,
lIEM #10 - Stavros & Panaaiota Demosthenis (Mr. Homemade) for variances of (1) 3.25 ft
in height to permit a freestanding sign of 23.25 ft; and (2) 18.5 sq ft to permit a .
freestanding sign of 82.5 sq ft to permit nonconforming signage to remain at .1765 Gulf-
to-Bay Blvd, Suburb Beautiful, Blk B, Lots 1, 2, 5 & 7, zoned CG (General Commercial). IDl
93-94
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing ,
freestanding sign to remain: 1) a height variance of 3.25 feet from the permitted 20 feet
to allow a freestanding sign 23.25 feet high, and 2) an area variance of 18.5 square feet
from the permitted 64 square feet to allow a freestanding sign with an area of 82.5 square
feet.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard
and Woodruff Avenue, and is in the CG zoning district.
The proposed Keene Road extension may affect the Mr. Homemade restaurant
property because it appears likely additional right of way will be needed from the front of
this property for improvement of the Gulf to Bay Boulevard / Keene Road intersectiof1.
Because roadway design plans are not finalized, it is difficult to estimate when acquisition
and construction may occur, and to what extent the property may be affected. Under any
circumstance, given the design and acquisition work that 'must occur, staff estimates it
will be more than two years beforo'roadway construction begins. '
("':
"c'
The applicant indicates if these variances are not approved, there will be an
ur.necessary expenditure of funds when 11... DOT takes an amount of property requiring
the sign be moved again." Staff notes, however, according to the survey drawing
submitted as part'of the application, the existing sign meets the City's 5 foot setback,
requirement. Therefore, there is no requirement that the sign be relocated at this time.
The sign does not, however, meet the City's area and height requirements. It would be
inequitable to other business owners and property owners who have complied with the,
City's size and height requirements, to grant a variance for this sign. The. applicant has
the option of altering the sign panels to comply with the City's size and height
requirements, while maintaining the existing sign pole. If, in the future, the sign must be
relocated due to right of way acquisition. the sign can be relocated at that time. In any
event, the sign should not have to be relocated twice.
The existence of this 23.25 foot high, 82.5 square foot sign is not in character with
signage permitted for the surrounding commercial areas and diverts attention from those
land uses. The granting of these variances will detract from 'surrounding businesses that
have conforming signs as well as negatively affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's requests do not meet the standards for variance
approval.
Scott Shufor,d explained the application and stated the applicant may be nf~ected by
the Keene Road extension but there probably would be no impact for approximately two
years. ,
c'~
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
19
, ,
, ;i.<,,J;
,~
Vernon Todd; attorney representing the owner, stated tI,at the sign, erected under
a permit prior to the code change, is 14.9% in excess of the height permitted and 22.4%
in excess of the al10wed square footage. He indicated it would place an undue hardship on
his client if property is taken for the Keene Road extension. He feels the applicant meets
the standards for approval and tl,e variance requests do not violate the spirit or intent of
the code.
r,
Discussion ensued regarding the overpass at Keene and Gulf to Bay. It was
indicated that an overpass is not planned at this time. '
, Commissioner Fitzgerald pointed out that variances requested by Young's Bar-B-Q
were denied. '
Commissioner Deegan moved to deny the requested variances for the subject
property for failure to meet Section 45.24; Standards for ApprovaL items 1-8. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #11 - Pinellas County for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 3.3 ft in height
and 7 sq ft in area to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 305 Osceola Ave; S.,
See 16-29-15, M&B 13.04, zoned UC,(C) (Urban Center Core). SV 93-97
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the placement of a freestanding sign
3.3 feet in height and 7 square feet in area in a'zoning district where freestanding signs
are not allowed.
~;q
-....... I
."
c ~>
The subject property ,is located on the east side of S. Osceola Avenue, north of
Court Street. and is in the UC(Cl zoning district.
This property is located in the downtown core. Ordinarily, attached signs are used
to identify downtown businesses. Further, freestanding signs are not permitted in this
zone because properties in this district are typically developed with no setback from
downtown sidewalks. The subject property, however, unlike most district properties, is
positioned approximately 26 feet from the S. Osceola Avenue right of way.
The proposed freestanding sign is modestly sized. Staff finds this property to be
, unique given the setback of the building, and the request is minimal.
The proposed 3.3 foot high, 7 square foot sign is in character with the signage
permitted for the surrounding commercial areas and does not divert attention from those
land uses. The granting of this variance will not detract from surrounding businesses and
properties that have conforming signs, and will not affect the appearance of the
community.
,
John Richter explained the application and noted the request is to allow a
freestanding sign where one is not permitted. Staff feels the request is modest both in
, '
height and in area.
C"
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
20
< (
Il
"
~"::I""::~ .~ .: .
c~
,.
Camille Bozard, representing the applicant, stated the applicant plans to change
several, signs to make them uniform. In response to a question, she stated this would be
the only sign for the building. .
Mr. Shuford stated staff would consider Commission ,action allowing freestanding
signs where they are presently not permitted as direction on how the code should be
changed to address this matter.
I
I
I
, j
,
< '
Commissioner Deegan noted an attached sign would be as visible as the proposed
sign and F.lxpressed concerns about setting a precedent. He commented that while the
Com mission does, not consider a sign's message content, he' wondered if the sign would
indicate this is a Pinellas County building. It was stated it would.
Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a variance to allow a freestanding sign
3.3 feet in height and 7 square feet in area for the subject property for meeting Section
45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote
being taken'; Mayor Garvey and Commissioners Fitzgerald, Berfield, and Thomas voted .
II Aye," Commissioner Deegan vot.ed "Nay." ~otion carried.
("
....
ITEM #12 - E. Keith Rotz & Garv S. Rabe (Carvl's Natural Foods & Juice Bar) for variances
(1) to permit a freestanding sign of 12 ft in height and 15 sq ft; (2) to permit a
freestanding sign of 10.58 ft in height and 15 sq ft; (3) of 6, ft to permit a freestanding
sign 1 ft into right-of-way; and (4) of 5.75 ft to permit a freesta'nding sign. 75ft into right-
of-way to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 121 Ft. Harrison Ave N., Gould &
Ewing's 1 st Add, Blk 1, part of Lot 3,' and all of Lot 4, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core).
SV 93-'00
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the continuation of two existing
freestanding signs; one oriented to N. Ft. Harrison Avenue, 12 feet high. 15 square feet in
area, and encroaching 1 foot into the N. Ft. Harrison Avenue right of way; and one
oriented to Watterson Avenue, 10.58 feet high, 15 square feet in area. and encroaching
0.75 feet into the Watterson Avenue right of way:
The subject property is located on the east side of N. Ft. Harrison Avenue and is in
the UC(C) zoning district.
!.
,
This property is located in the downtown core. Ordinarily, attached signs are used
to identify downtown businesses. Further, freestanding signs are not permitted in this
zone because properties in this district are typically developed with no setback from
downtown sidewalks. The subject property, however, is positioned approximately 19 feet
. from the N. Ft. Harrison Avenue right of way and approximately 17 feet from the
Watterson Avenue right of way. Further, the buildings located directly to the north and
south on N. Ft. Harrison Avenue, and Watterson Avenue are built to the sidewalk. Without
!
I
T
C.J
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
21
i _
i.' . -I' .
;" .:..... I I"
" JO
~ . . f
c.....\
a freestanding sign in proximity to the right of way, this property would be without any
meaningful identification to motorists on either street.
Staff finds this property to be unique given the setback of the building and the
request to be minimal given the modest dit'!'lensions of these signs. .
It is noteworthy that the signs are not in a particularly good state of repair. The
sign poles are rusted and in need of paint. Also, a panel in the sign oriented to northbound
traffic on N. Ft. Harrison Avenue is broken and in need of replacement. these conditions
should be corrected by the applicant.
The existence of these 1 5 square foot signs will not detract from. businesses that
have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of the community if
maintained in a good state of repair. ,
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all the standards for variance approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and noted free standing signs are not allowed
in this zoning district. The signs are small and encroach on the right of way. Staft feels it
would be difficult to make use of attached signage but recommend that three conditions '
be placed on the granting of the request. '
Keith Rotz stated he concurs with staff's recommendations.
("'"
,.>.
,
l.' .
Commissioner Deegan noted the sign is in a state of disrepair and requested an
additional condition be included requiring repair of the sign within 60 days. He agreed tl1at
a freestanding sign is warranted in this situation.
Commissioner Thomas also requested the addition of a condition requiring the
awning sign to be repaired or removed within 60 days.
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a variance to allow the continuation of
two existing freestanding signs; one 1 2 feet high. 1 5 square feet in area, and encroaching
1 foot into the N. Ft. Harrison Avenue right of way; and one 10.58 feet high, 15 square
feet in area, and encroaching 0.75 feet into the Watterson Avenue right of way for the
subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1 ~8, subject to
the following conditions: 1) in the event any regulated feature of either sign is changed. '
the encroachment into the right of way shall be eliminated.. 21 the signs shall be repaired
within 60 days and then maintained in a good state of repair, 3) the awning signs shall be
repaired or removed within 60 days, and 41 that by constructing a sign within the street
setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental
agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or 'removing the sign in the event the
property is acquired by eminent domain, road widenihg or any other public purpose. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
,
I
I
, !:
, ,
1';'
I,
~.'
minSP03c.94
, 3/21/94
22
, ,
,', ~ .. : . I '.. . . l'
~:. .".'. ( ~. . :
, I
(>
ITEM #13 " Anthonv Ales for a variance of 4 ft to permit a freestanding sign 1 ft from
street right"of-way (Drew 5t) to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2152 Drew St,
Mosell Acres, part of Lot 3, zoned CG (General Commercial).SV 93-101
The applicant is requesting a setback variance of 4 feet from tI'e required 5 feet to
allow the existing freestanding sign to remain 1 foot from the Drew Street right of way.
The subject property is located on the north side of Drew Street, east of NE
Coachman Road, and is in the CG zoning district.
The application indicates the variance is requested because the existing parking lot
and drainage retention area leave no opportunity to relocate the sign. The applicant also
states if the sign is relocated,.a large oak tree will obstruct its visibility. '
(:',.
-I"~ .
.... 'i'~
.,.
Staff review of the property reveals it is feasible to relocate the sign in a
northwesterly direction in the drainage retention area thereby meeting the 5 foot setback
requirement from Drew Street. No parking spaces would be eliminated and the sign would
not be any less visible due to trees. However, staff does not recommend requiring this
action. The sign currently conforms to the height and area specifications of the code. 'The
lone nonconformity is the setback from the Drew Street right of way. It is staff's position
that the cost to the applicant to rolocate the sign would outweigh the benefit derived by
the public from such relocation.
The granting of this variance will not detract from businesses that have conforming
signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all of the standards for variance approval.
Neither the applicant nor their representative was present although the applicant
had been at the meeting earlier and requested a continuance. Commissioner Thomas
inquired whether the Commission could proceed even though a continuance was
requested. The staff recommendation is to approve the request.
Mr. Shuford stated that the Commission may act in any way they see fit regardless
of the request for a ~ontinuance.
,\,
r
f:
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a setback variance of 4 feet to allow the
existing freestanding sign to remain 1 foot frol11 the Drew Street right of way for the
subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8, subject to
the following conditions: 1) that by constructing a sign within the street setback pursuant
to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no governmental agency shall be Hable.
for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the event the property is acquired by
eminent domain, road widening or any other public purpose and 2) that if the applicant
wishes to come back for rehearing they may do so. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
lJ.
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
23
i:
.,
,- ;, \ t .~',.
, ,
. ..~ .
, ,
, I
, ,
, '
r'
ITEM #14 - American National Red Cross for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of
11.5 ft in,height, 62 sq 1t of sign area, and with a setback of 2 ft from street right-of-way
,(Court 5t) to remain where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit nonconforming ,
sign age to remain at 624 Court St, Court Square, Blk 12, Lots 13-16 together with
Magnolia Park, Blk 12, Lot 2, zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-102
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the continuation of a freestanding
sign 11.5 feet in height, 62 square feet in area, with a setback of 2 feet from the Court
Street right of way, in a zoning district where freestanding signs are not allowed.
(
, 'I,
f'
l'
I
, I
. !
. ~ . 'j
J!"
,
I
The ~ubject property is located on the north side of Court Street, east of S. Garden
Avenue, and is in'the UC(CI zoning district.
':c
~)
This property is located in the downtown core. Ordinarily, attached signs are used
to identify downtown businesses. Freestanding signs are not permitted in this zone
because properties in this district are typically developed with no setback from downtown
sidewalks. The subject property is positioned approximately 50 feet from the sidewalk.
Due to the setback, staff feels a freestanding sign is appropriate to identify the use .of this
property. Further, because the property upon which. the sign is located is greater than an
acre in size, and because the sign is low in height (11.5 feet) and oriented to a major ,
thoroughfare having a 100 focit wide right of way, staff considers the existing 62 square
foot sign to be in scale with the development. Lastly, regarding the 2 foot setback, it is
staff's position that the sign be permitted to remain in its current location. This is because
staff contends the sign should be allowed to' remain without any alteration to the existing
'size and height, and because the public gain that would result from the sign being moved
back would not outweigh the cost to the applicant to accomplish such action.
"
, r
, ,
, j
The existence of this 11.5 foot high, 62 square foot sign, is in keeping with the
developed character of this property. The granting of this variance will not detract from
businesses that have conforming signs and '{Viii not adversely affect the appearance of the
community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all the 'standards for variance approval.
Mr. Shuford explained the application and noted ,this large parcel is on a major
thoroughfare. He noted the additional condition regarding signs in the setback should be
added to the motion.
, AI Copeland. representing the applicant, stated the sign is used to advertise health
and safety courses, promote fundraising, etc.. The Red Cross has had a 76 year presence
in the community, with 20 years at this location. The sign in question is the only one they
have. .
Commissioner Deegan questioned what signage is allowed in this zoning district
and asked if there is any limited office zoning between this parcel and general commercial
zoning.
c..
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
24
, ' ,
;';; ,. ,.
, ,
,
c
In responso, Mr. Shuford stated there is some limited office zoning between this
parcel and general commercial. The height of the sign could be lowered to eight feet with
24 square feet in sign area which is permitted in n'earby zon!ng districts.
, '
Commissioner Deegan inquired of the applicant's representative if a smaller sign or
a lesser height would suffice. Mr. Copeland responded the height could be reduced but he'
did not feel the sign's size could be decreased. . .',
Commissioner Thomas noted staff is recommending placement of signs where the
code does not permit them and inquired if staff planned to recommend changes to the
code. '
Mr. Shuford responded that the Commission had previously indicated they did not
want to address changes. Staff is reviewing Commission action and basing proposed.
changes to the code on results of de,cision,s made regard,ing signage.
The Mayor noted in 1992, the Commission's wish to not address changes did not
preclude modifications from being addressed at a Jater date. '
Commissioner Deegan noted there is not much clutter in this area and questioned
the height of ather signs in the area.
, '
Mr. Shuford stated that ground signs in the area are generally six feet tall and 24
square feet in area.
, (~";
Commissioner Deegan recommended that the area variance be approved but the
height be limited,to eight feet. Commissioner Thomas felt this was a reasonable
compromise.
Mr. Copeland stated he felt it was unfair to require them to lower the sign. This is
a non profit organization with 1,700 volunteers.
Discussion ensued regarding accommodating the applicant's needs and the fact the
Commission is willing to meet the applicant half way by allowing th'em a larger sign.
The Mayor clarified that the Commission' would approve a freestanding sign at a
height of eight feet with the existing square footage.
In response to a question, Mr. Shuford stated that, in general, signs in this zoning
should be eight feet high and have an area of 64 square feet if the parcel is larger than an
acre ~nd 24 squ~re feet if it is less than an acre. '
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a variance to allow the continuation of a
freestanding sign 8 feet high, 62 square feet in areaf with a setback of 2 feet from the
C~urt Street right of way for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards
l,;.
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
25
r '
<, .'.
~"I ;,~ ../:. i.
)'
.j,
; :.r
, ,
, ..
r>
,for Approval, items 1-8, subject to the following condition: , that by constructing a sign
within the street setback pursuant to this variance, the owner and applicant agree that no
governmental agency shall be liable for the cost of relocating or removing the sign in the
event the property is acquired by eminen,t domain, road widening or any other public
purpose. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #15 - H.H. Baskin. Sr. Rental Properties. Inc (Workbench. Inc) for a variance of 10
sq ft to'permit a total of 58 sq ft of attached signage to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 704 Court St, Magnolia Park, Blk 11. Lots 8 & 9 fess railroad right of ways,
zoned UC(C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-106
The applicant is requesting an area variance of 10 square feet from the permitted
48 square feet to allow the continuation of the two attached signs having a combined area
of 58 square feet.
The subject property is located on the north side of Court Street, east of East
Avenue, and is in the UC(C) zoning district.
There are two attached signs on this' building. According to the drawings that
. accompany the application, the "Workbench" sign has an area of 54 square feet, and the
"Finite" sign has an area of 1.9 square feet. Together, the two signs measure 55.9 square
feet. Accordingly, the request can be reduced from 10 square feet to 7.9 square feet.
(""
'. i I
, .
.. '
A 7.9 square foot variance represents a 16% departure fron,- the maximum area
allowed by code. The building on which the sign is placed is large. Considering the size of-
the building and the refatively small amount that the existing sign exceeds the maximum
area allowed by code, staff feels the standards for variance approval are satisfied.
The 55.9 square feet of attached signage is in scale with the building, will not
divert attention from nearby signs, and will not detract from the appearance of downtown.
John Richter explained the application. Due to the size of the building, staff feels it
is a unique request and represents a minimum variance.
I
I
,
I
I,
Gordon Williamson, representing the applicant. stated three businesses operate in
the '11,000 square foot building. The third business does not need a sign as it also
occupies the freestanding building across the street which has a sign.
Commissioner Berfield moved to approve an area variance of 7.9 square feet to
allow the continuation of two attached signs having a combined area of 55.9 square feet
for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8,
subject to the condition that, in the event the sign is changed or replaced, it shall then be
made to conform. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
, I, ,
.c, ~~.
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
26
, .'
"." '
, '"t
j~ . >!~ ..~~.
i
\'
ITEM #1 6 ~ Fortune Savinos Bank for a variance to permit 2 freestanding signs of 8 ft in
height and 48 sq ft in area where freestanding signs ar e prohibited to permit
nonconforming signage to remain at 606 Chestnut St, Magnolia Park, Blk 13, Lots 1.6 &
17 less street and south 1/2 of alley, and Lot 18, together with Court Square, Blk 13, Lots
1-3 and north Y2 of alley, zoned UC(CI (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-107
I
, I
':1
I
:1
The applicant is requesting the following variance to permit the continuation of the.
two existi~g freestanding signs at a lower height. (Currently the signs are 23.5 and 17.7
feet high. The applicant proposes to reduce the height of both signs to a maximum of 8
feet): a variance to allow the continuation of two existing freestanding signs, each
measuring 48 square feet in area, in a zone where freestanding signs are not permitted,
one sign oriented to Chestnut Street and the other oriented to Court Street.
. The subject property is located on the north side of Chestnut Street, east of S. Ft.
Harrison Avenue, and is in the UC(C) zoning district.
, ,
This property has frontage on two major thoroughfares in the downtown core.
Attached signs are normally used to identify downtown businesses because the buildings
are typically developed to accommodate pedestrian traffic by providing no setback from
downtown sidewalks or side property lines. However, properties on Chestnut Street do
not fit this development pattern, they are developed to accommodate vehicular traffic:
The buildings are typically situated back from property lines, with on~site parking lots. Like
most other Chestnut Street properties, the Fortune Bank prop~rty is designed primarily to
serve motorists, not pedestrians. In fact, the Bank has driveway access to both Chestnut
Street and Court Street. It is reasonable the bank be identified with roadside signs on '
each of these thoroughfares because the property design is not adapted to identification
without such signs. In a similar situation, the BP service station at the intersection of
Myrtle Avenue and Drew Street, also located in the UC(C) zone, was approved a variance
for two freestanding signs.
,(: ':
~~.
Absent a specified sign size in the code, it is difficult to assess whether the .
requested sign area constitutes a minimum variance. Nevertheless, staff feels that it is a
minimum variance for the following reasons: 1) both thoro,ughfares have four lanes of
traffic; 2) ,the Chestnut and Court Street corridors are characterized by a diverse mixture of
land uses; 3) the proposed 8. foot height will cause the sign to be a low profile sign; and 4)
the sign is a pre-existing sign, not a new sign.
The continuation of these 48 square foot signs. lowered to a height of 8 feet, is
generally in character with the signage permitted for the surrounding downtown
properties. The granting of this variance will not detract from businesses that have
conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of downtown or the City.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all the standards for variance approval.
Scott Shuford explained the application and noted that the property is
approximately one acre in size and the building is setback from the right of way.
l/
minSP03c.94
3/21/94,
27
"
I ~ +
~ },' ~ 'I": "I'" ~ "\, . , .
. :.. . I
,. ': ' >'
,~
. ,
:!"
,I
r 4r.
"
,
....
, '
,
, ,
~
I'
Catherine Dixon, representing the applicant, was present.
\:'
In response to a question, Mr. Shuford stated that the property is close to an acre
in size.
"
.
Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a variance to allow the continuation of
two existing freestanding signs, one oriented to Chestnut Street and one oriented to Court
Street, each measuring 48 square feet in area and being lowered to a height of 8 feet for
. the subject property for meeting Section 45.24/ Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
.... :
;.' ~
ITEM #17 - K.D. Sauder, TRE & K.D. Sauder, Trust for a variance of .3 sq ft to permit a
1.8 sq ft sign area ratio per building occupancy width to permit nonconforming signage to
remain at 1969 Sunset Point Rd,' Sec 1-29-15, Pinellas Groves Sub, part of Lots 1 & 2 less
road, zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial). SV 93~1 09
I',.
M:
h
The applicant is requesting the following variance to allow continued use of the
"sign band" that runs the full length of the building front: a ratio variance of 0.3 square
foot of attached sign' area per 1.0 linear foot of building width from the permitted 1.5/1.0
ratio to allow a ratio of 1.8 square feet of sign area per 1.0 linear foot of building width.
The subject property is located on the south side of Sunset Point Road, west of
Hercules Avenue, and is in the CN zoning district.
#::':l
~,
The permitted area for attached signs is determined by a ratio: 1.5 square feet of
, area per 1.0 linear, foot of building width. The Time Plaza shopping center, constructed
approximately 3 years ago, was built with a "sign band" integrated into the building's
facade that runs the full length of the building front' and measures 1 . B feet vertically.
Consequently, each business in the center has more attached sign area than is allowed by
code. Rather than each tenant in the center applying for a variance, the property owner
applied for the entire ,center. It should be noted that some of the tenants have additional
signs placed in windows that must be brought into compliance with the code. .
,".
The 1.8 foot high sign band exists because building plans were reviewed, and
permits issued, while the property was under the jurisdiction of Pinellas County. Shortly
atter the development was begun, the property was annexed into the City.
Since the sign band is integrated into the building architecture, it would be a costly
venture to narrow'it without negatively affecting the appearance of the facade and the
building 1 In general, sign bands work well for the purpose of identifying occupancies in
shopping centers because they 'serve to promote a consistent theme for the plaza. If the
code were to be strictlv enforced, the resulting public benefit would be small in
comparison to the cost to the applicant to achieve compliance.
. I:
.
The existence of this 1.8 foot sign band will not detract from the surrounding
businesses that have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appea~ance of the,
community.
,:
l/
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
28
r\ '
t,
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all the standards for variance approval.
'0
r , . ," ".. '
"
. -~.~
I "
'.
. ,
.'
. '.' I. ~,
, "
John Richter explained the application in detail stating that the request is 'to allow a
sign band on the front of the building which exceeds the ratio of signage' permitted. Some
tenants have window signage which will be brought into conformance. The project was
developed in the County. Since the sign band is part of the architecture, it blends in well
with the building. ' '
James Baxter, representing the applicant. stated all other non conforming signs
have been removed.
Commissioner Deegan questioned what could be done should the non conforming
signs not be removed or to assure they do not reappear. He expressed concern because
the tenants were not-present to represent themselves.
Commissioner Berfield inquired of staff if any requirements were placed on the
applicant upon annexation into the City.
Mr. Shuford responded that the freestanding sign was brought up at that time but
permits to build were pulled in the County.
Mr. Baxter stated this was all worked out with' staff at the time of the annexation
agreement. It was noted that the decorative material, if included as part of the sign, was
not in compliance but all agreed it, was close to complian~e. '
("
. I.; Discussion ensued regarding signage and the leases and concern was expressed
regarding what recourse the City would have if the tenants do not agree to the sign
limitations. Mr. Baxter responded it is implied the tenants must comply with sign code
regulations.
, Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a ratio variance of 0.3 square foot of
attached sign area per 1.0 linear foot of building width to allow a ratio of 1.8 square feet
of sign area per 1.0 linear foot of building width for the subject property for meeting
Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items '1-8, subject to condition that all attached
signs on this property that are not part of this application be made to conform to city code
and that an addel}dum requiring. conformance with' the sign code be added to all leases.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
r
ITEM #18 ~ Waclaw & Zenana Niewiarowski (Sunset Point Wine & Liauor) for variances (1)
to permit an above roof sign; and (2) of 44 sq ft to permit a total of 108 sq ft of attached
signage to permit nonconforming signage to remain at 2516 Sunset Point Rd, Blackburn's
Sub, part of Lot 12, zoned CG (General Commercial). SV 93-111
.
The applicant is requesting the following variances to allow the existing
nonconforming attached signs to remain: 1) a variance to ahow a roof-mounted sign,
which is prohibited, and 2) an area variance of 44 square feet from the permitted 64
square feet to allow 108 square feet of attached signage.
L/
minSP03c.94 '
3/21/94
29
I'
,
i::.' :,'
";".l '.
~\
The subject property is located on the north side of Sunset Point Road, west of
US Hwy 19 N, and is in the CG zoning district.
There are two attached signs on this business. One, 60 square feet in area, is
, located over the front of the business establishment on the roof. The other, a wall sign, is
on the building's east side and measures 48<square feet.
The applicant, indicates the variances are necessary to identify this busines's. In
particular, the applicant states if the roof sign is removed, there will be no way to
communicate to the public the type of business that exists on this property.
It is staff's position that the applicant can both comply with code and identify this
business. Since this is the only business on the property, the freestanding sign can be
used to communicate to the public that this business is Sunset Point Wine and Liquor.
Attached signs can also be used for this purpose. The 64 square feet of attached signs
allowed by code is sufficient to identify this business as it is to identify other businesses in
the CG zone. Further, it should not be necessary to locate a sign on the roof because
there is ample opportunity for a building of this size to locate signs belo~ the roofline.
There is generous window area on the front of the store where a sign could be placed. In
short, staff finds no circumstance to warrant different treatment for this business than
other businesses in this zone.
, ("
. ....J,
' ~ ". \' ;,
."
The existence of 1 08 square feet of attached signage. including a 60 square foot
roof-mounted sign is not in character with the signage permitted for other uses in this zone
and will detract from businesses that have conforming sings as well as negatively affect
the appearance of the community.
,
Mr. Shuford explained the application and stated that staff feels signage regulations
allow adequate identification. They do not feel that the area variance is justified.'
"
Christopher Niewiarowski, repr0senting the applicant, stated the applicant is
proposing to build a canopy behind rhe sign in order to attach the sign to the building. He
stated the Caesar's Jewelers sign and a tree on their property block the signage of this
, business. He questioned if the applicant could keep the neon sign as it serves as signage
only in the nighttime.
, The Mayor noted with the freestanding sign on the property, there is no need for
signage on the building.
Mr. Shuford noted if these variances are denied, the applicant may keep the sign on
the east side. It is the roof sign which is in violation of the code.
Commissioner Thomas inquired if the roof sign could remain if a mansard was built.
Mr. ShLJford stated they could have a sign on the mansard but staff does not feel
I. the area variance is justified. If the roof sign were removed, no variance is required. They
1,- .i
"
minSP03c.94
, 3/21/94
30
.. . ,
. '",t .< r'
, ... I .. .',
~:, ~:' ~ ' ,', . . :.
'I .';, , ;,
I'
I "
,
t ~ / "l
l't:'.:' .
. /:,;
,/ ,
., . ,. t.,
I .
~. . f {
, ,.,..,
'I,
~
could divide the permitted area between a sign on the mansard and the sign on the east or
west side 6f the building.
Commissioner Thomas lTlo~ed to deny the requested variances for th~ subject
property for failure to meet Section 45.24, Standards for Approval, items 1-8. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
..~
ITEM #19 - William G. Pontrello for a variance to permit a freestanding sign of 4.42 ft in
height, 4 sq ft in sign area, and with a setback of 6.7 ft from a street right of way
{Chestnut 'Street) to remain where freestanding signs are prohibited to permit
nonconforming s;gnage to remain at 619 Chestnut St, Wallace's Add, part of Blk 5, zoned
UC{C) (Urban Center (Core). SV 93-112
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the continuation of a freestanding
sign 4.42 feet in height, 4 square feet in, area, and 6.7 feet from the Chestnut Street right
of way, in a zoning district where freestanding signs are not allowed.
The subject property is located on the south side of Chestnut Stroet, east of S. Ft.
Harrison Avenue, and is in the UC(C) 20ning district.
(,.,
.. ',t ':',
~i,'
This property is located in .the downtown core. Ordinarily, attached signs are used
to identify downtown businesses. Freestanding signs are not permitted in this zone'
because properties in this district are typically developed with no setback from downtown
sidewalks. The subject property, however. is positioned approximately 24 feet from the
Chestnut Street right of way.
I
I'
i:
The freestanding sign is modestly sized. Staff finds this' property to be unique,
given the setback of the building. and the request to be minimal given the modest
dimensions of this sign.
The existence of this 4.42 foot high. 4 square foot sign, having a setback of 6.7
feet from the Chestnut Street right of way. is in character with the signage permitted for
the surrounding commercial areas. The granting of this variance will not detract from
businesses th~t have conforming signs and will not adversely affect the appearance of
downtown or the community.
Staff feels the applicant's request meets all the standards .lor variance approval.
John Richter explained tl18 application stating that the request was to permit a
freestanding sign where one is not allowed.
(/
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
, Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a variance to allow the continuation of a '
freestanding sign 4.42 feet in height', 4 square feet in area, and 6.7 feet from the Chestnut
Street rig~t of way for the subject property for meeting Section 45.24, Standards for
31
:\~~~~~::-':.~~.;.. ,~:'..I."" :.~,' ..
~.' ~, ,':; I
~+i. ... ~. \. d I,
"
~. . I I
, , '
. I '
",
,. "
,
, ,
:,1
i::j~ I .:, t. ' .' a >; . . ~
:" ~ ,I': l, : I . .,. .."t.1 >~ .
, 1.";,
,':, ,~
Approval, items 1-8. The, motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken; Mayor
Garvey and Commissioners Fitzgerald, Berfield, and Thomas voted .~ Aye, II Commissioner
Deegan voted "Nay. tt Motion carried.
ITEM #20 - Direction reaardina Request for Reconsideration of SV93-59
(Dickey/Rehabworks, Inc.) ,
"
Scott Shuford stl:3ted staff had received a letter fr.om the applicant's represent~tive
requestirJg reconsideration of the variance which was granted to a lesser degree than
originally requested. He stated the compromise permitted only one sign to remain with
both businesses using that one sign. .
'!
It was noted that the applicanes repr~sentative was not present. "
Commissioner Thomas moved to deny reconsideration, of this matter. The motion'
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
)'
ITEM #21 - ICont. from 3/17/94) Stein Mart Lease
>.
The City Attorney stated the City had not yet received the Stein Mart Lease in its
finalized form but indicated that the City should have it in hand by Tuesday,
March 22, 1994.
,(" "\,
....;
The Interim City Manager stated they would reschedule this item to the special'
meeting to be held on Marc~ 23, 1994.
ITEM #22 - Environmental Survey - Phase 1 & 2
The Interim City Manager stated it was imperative that the Commission move
forward on this item as there is a three week deadline to meet. Staff recommends the
Commission award the contract to FGS for $17,350. Discussion ensued as to what was
covered by th!s contract and it was noted that it related to the rectangular portion of the
East End project which is approximately 15 acres.
Commissioner Deegan questioned whether the contractor would be providing any
services outside the scope of the contract.
Ms.' Deptula responded it was not anticipated there would b~ other costs. The City
requested the contractor to quote an hourly rate should the need arise for additional
services.
"
Commissioner Deegan requested the hem be brought back to the Commission
should the original cost increase significantly. .
"", I
, ,(
p
minSP03c.94
3/21/94
32
..
J
I
,
I,
I
i
'r
"
':J
,j'
I
",.
, ,
. "
"; ;},
, ~",
~ "i. < r
..; 'L.. '",
,~~H~{::':',,:,t.. \"<'::~:f "," '" '
f~,,~"' I';' I.... .'~ '-"
:,'\ ,T'~ '~;>,I: ,<)!~,':'I': :.f;. ..,'r' i ...
.\',' 'T
'" . .
!;<:;> ,'" ': ': : I'
} '. ~
'I" ~'.. .
r; f,'
.~. I . I. '" ," . , '. ~. ',/
~; , ' , I , ~ '
:";'~:': i:\ ';:.':~.~< ';,. ':" ," ; , ,:~:' ,
{ ,'''' :O-JI . 'I \0' '.". .,. '. .
, . . t ~" ri" ~ 1. ' .. t . . -a ~ . ~
''l~~....... ;,...-..:~\'t).'l!~ _4~. '. 01,1. "'1.."'+, . -i ~r..'. iI-,.j,."l~ j '. " . .',
e;i:~"<t~.f~~~ -~:~ :~; -;~ .:'i~;~' ~~. +~.."( :';I!"~: ~\ ..,,;...~ ~f :~ /;:i.:.~' ':. ~:,:~ . ( .' ~
"
.'. '.
"
,,'
"
,
i '
\
I,.)
,.
, ,I
".:
, "
',-i' , ,J,>:,'( ..- J"
"
,',
'., .< ~.
. U .~,:
f. "
.' .J
, ,
"
, '
. ~!~
. ~ \ - :!
.....
., ~ ~.~
> J~
,"' ",I
.: .I ~ '.~:" ~'I;
. ", '
, .. .~.
",
"
..
i ,
. ,
,',
"
,/
,
, r:'
,. I~.,,:::.:t
.-
::,\';i::~
"
l:l
. . i ' : l ~
I.' ~.
.'~ ",
", .....
, .~
"
.', ~'
,.:,
"
, ..'~~<
"; '::ij
,0;
l~'
Commissioner Deegan moved to approve award of the contract to FGS; The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. .
"
. . ~ .
, \/1'
"
" .
, .'
" '
"
The meeting adjourned at ,12:25 p.m.
"
.' ~I.
",
. 'r.
f:. .:",\
,-,
",:';
':
. 'I..'~
r ;..:~:
. /,
," .,
. ':. ~.:L.,'
.i.'
~. . l "
." . :."
,.,
:~::~ :
. ,r
.
ATTEST:~ 2;. ~
" ," ,,: , . Ci~y Clerk '
" l'.
. .
. ,-[)er.t
-:-
",
,j
,,::~:D
'-,
" "
,
,:
, ,
"
. ~ ~ : c . :~'I~
1,..\'7
,1,' r.:.t
"; ,,::!"M'
" ,:,/,,/,\
~ .. :>~'. i ~~.r
,,'
, ~
-, "
01
. ,
i'
. ~ :
:- . . ~
"
, '
\:.,p)'
~V,'~"
'" .
.~ i', .'
~: ~ T'l . .
j;:';:,:,:,:': ;
,"
':
"
..
'-
,< ... JC'
:j.
. ,[,
~ '. '.; /
:.
'''/'' '
',I
'.'
,
"
...
i':
"
"
,"
, .
}":
,::co-:.:;-.
~ '. . ; ~ ...,)
,+ '",.
, ,
minSP03c.94
3/21 /94
33
. "'>11
"
j,}'
~ttr,,;~,,~j;'.:!t"~!!'l./ r" ,;, "'ii,J~
~!j;Jt t'(;::;ti';':; ,:)'j::::,:\Qi;f:~:i'