05/12/1994 (2)
. : r . ': . . ';.. . , ' . ' . ... . ., ~ ~- . .,.. " . . _ '. ., . . . ~ .... '. '. . I . ". .~. . . . , . ,
'~'.. '. I, ..
'-"-,', >
; ,
/ ~ /
":
",
~~1't"'"~.......,..,.,".....IlJ~l ...,
;:.,' ':
"I:.;..:.,'
DCAB
...'. .
'.1' >:,~ .
Development Code Adjustment Board
Minutes
"T' ~. .'
.,+'
:~~'/ .,
tiY>
~J:}
:~:~~;~:'.: I.:'.:
Iri:\!;:, ....
i~~~r~~j},~r~; ~ :
~.~,~;.. ",. " I
1~0:l;;;:';."
if,<"~,,, "," "
".~,J.~j',..,:' I ::-. . /..
~,\,,:~~..,,} .'';''.;,',',.. 'I
~~fi;N~\;' .' . .
~#"'~l"'" j , !.. ,"
~t~~}.ic~:>":, '
~};l',>..." ",
~~j~~<:~;'X':;; .
t&.,(.,<>, '" ','I""" ",
~~ ;.- .....~ \'.".. 'I/~ I,. . ~
m.r \'" 'r' ". .' . ,
~~~i~':<:;<r; ',:~ '.,.. ,,', '
'If v ".~ i-~,1- " r, . . , .
~~WS:;:";'..
i~."i~,~::/\:,~<,: :',:'
'!i.J,~, It,,('.'.,..' "
t ~yIf'~\""Jr."......,,:...' -..~'~ .
I~~\~~/L/;:~';. ,~,,',
, ~f/1r": ,", . ," ,"
i;.~;.;;t.}.. ~ ~.. .:. {'. .'. . . ,
~ij:)..~.'". '.;:..:' .'.. :
~,,!~~;...;~. ... . . " ;: I. '
~~~:t\~l.:.>\ .:....~.....
p,f~,(",,~:'.., ". ',' ,
l ~i '~},i.~~;"t:'~.' ,~. .;',
?J.~.{.~:::..; ,
:i~.""" ,
~f~J~/>\""
'Date
A211~ J~ I"~
.'
,',
, c, ~,~,.' ~" ~;.::'7~-' ~:~~ "~~~~~~~
~' _" < . ~ -;..:r, l,,~ :,'" ',1. "'1'~'';.' . , '..~ .' .' .: ~ ' . t'. .' ,< . . ~ . '-L~ .~~ft,l\qp...l-aw~...;~
! ...~\Jtf;~..t"""'....:j:~-::l!."",~":;-I'- "'.Jr~: 1',:/~~'.'.t:'j~t:I:"""""~:f~. J ' ~'I 1~: . ..... . "',' . .... . > . .
.(lbl"';.t...,l....-,,-Y... '. i,r..\.- '~J"'r.... '" l~ . ,I. 1 .. i' .. 'l' .,~
I !jJ~'\j~~f~~.f:l<~r1l.:'..~::~:..::';1)-'-;~ ~:~)):.....J"..,:,,:' ,', ~,:f.~. '; I \"rt. 'f'~' I ~r\_~"," .; .
~~'Rit<I~,'~>,;-:"\'.lr,..i. t ....y." ,.,~" \ ,.:11 '(' ,-." , ,{ ,..., r~..' ..
il~~Jif*Jtt)~..~;:~.~~~:)t~/'~\~f ~/\~'.P::.~~~lc;n~;;i~;~~i \ ~t! ~~t~.~:~~{~, \: L ::~ r.~,~.. ".' ~~,I~., ~: ~ ~ .~;.' "!:'..) ,.~'..;' 'u.'
, "
'. ~
.\"
I,;
",
, "
."
. ..;
..... .
" ,
..;:...
,......
~. ":
'q 1 .'~I.Y.t' \~',
" ,
i r',. :"->'.
. .<' ~'''':' " "':
'I',.
. .... ~ '.
. +". . ~
::~~ .~.
~
,,'
;o.c.
" I'.
+ ,'.'
. "
.;1,:
.
1,'.'\
" ,
"
. ,c
'""0"
" ..\ . ..
.; \.
"
.'
:.t.
DEVELOPMENT CODe ADJUSTMENT BOARD AGENDA
~hursday, May 12, 1994 ~ 1 ~OO p.m. - Commission Meeting Room,
City Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue - Clearwater, Florida
To consider requests for variances of the Land Development Code~
I. Public Hearings
1 . David P. Wade & Gail M. Karinja Wade for variances of (1) 7.5 ft to permit a
dock width of 25 ft where 17.5 ft is permitted; (2) 94 ft to permit a dock length of 119
ft where 25 ft is permitted; and (3) 4.2 ft to permit a dock position from an extended
property line of 1 2.5 ft where 1 6.7 ft is required at 1754 Sunset Drive, North Shore Park,
Blk 11, Lot 4 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential) and AL/C (Aquatic
Lands/Coastal). V 94-19
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is
based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted
in support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the
site or any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and
of no effect and 2) the requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within six (6) months
from the date of this public hearing.
2. Jay M. Dugan & Phyllis J. Lewellyn for variances of (1) 3 ft to permit a fence
and wall setback of 0 ft tor a wall portion from a street right-at-way (Landmark Dr) where
3 ft is required~ and (2) 3 ft to permit a wall portion to provide 0 ft landscape buffer where
3 ft is required at 2701 Ashwood Court, Wildwood of Countryside, Lot 16, zoned RS 8
(Single Family Residential). V 94-20
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is
based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted
in support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the
site or any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and
of no effect and 2) the requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within six (6) months
from the date of this public hearing.
3. Murray SorintSorin Realty Corp for variances of (1) 39 parking spaces to
permit a total of 658 parking spaces where 697 parking spaces are required~ and (2) 9.5
ft to permit a fence height of 15.5 ft where 6 ft is the permitted maximum height behind
a structural setback area from a street right-of-way at 2495 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, See 18-29-
16, M&Bs 42.01, 42.02, 42.08 & 42.09, zoned CG (General Commercial) and RM 8
(Multiple Family Residential 8). V 94-21
DeAB Action
1
05112/94
~'i':~~-"'~"~'~~'"'~""''''"''i,,,~t~1~:~i.:;.i'~04i';Uii;~;.~;(c~li('ii:'(~;~~\:m~~;i0g~ii1\~!~i;j~j~t~~~~~~~ff,;jiL;;~~
" ... . I .' I .,,, '. ~ '.. .... ., .: . . '. .' ' .'. ".
~
,0
..
,
"
, ,
~,. .
: ;,
,'. .
" '
'." "
;1:.';'" ,
~ ,~ ~
:.t~~
" ..,
"
Action: Granted variance # 1 as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This
variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the
applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
appHcant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted
in support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the
site or any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and
of no effect with the understanding that some field adiustments may be necessary: 2) the
requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this
public hearing; 3) all protected trees by size, species, and location shall be shown by the
applicant on the final site plan and 4) two out of the three large oak trees designated on
the site plan shall be retained on the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard frontage of the property; to
ensure this, the applicant will retain a professional arborist on the site to ensure viability
of the trees in accordance with the tree protection ordinance and to save the third tree, if
possible. If adjustments to the parking lot are necessary to save any trees consistent with
this condition, those adjustments will be made consistent with City code requirements.
Granted variance #2 as requested subject to the follOWing conditions: 1) This variance is
based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted
in support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the
site or any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and
of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit's) shall be obtained within six (6) months from
the date of this public hearing; 3) the area on the north side of the garden shop parallel to
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard shall be landscaped along the fence with shrubbery and trees as wide
as possible to the extent that such can be provided due to the dimensiona/limitations of
the site; and 4) landscaping shall also be installed adjacent to the east side property line
opposite the garden shop and lumber storage area contingent upon a good faith effort to
obtain approval from Florida Power Corporation.
The following land Development Code Amendments were also considered:
Ordinance No. 5597.94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land
Development Code; amending Sections 40.489, Code of Ordinances, to establish new
, parking requirements for the Bayfront Core, and Eastern Corridor subdistricts of the Urban
Center District; providing an effective date.
Action:
Recommended approval.
Ordinance No. 5613-94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land
Development Code; amending Section 40.433, Code of Ordinances, to add "accessory
dwellings" as a permitted use in the Infill Commercial District; providing an effective date.
Action:
Recommended approval.
DCAB Action
2
05112/94
~J:;~'>;'."";~~.~"';'';' ",,;: ,,,' "';;';,\41ft;;;~r;:i;'i,ii~>;);'i{iji;"i";,.';:ii;i~;;:~i:t~;i(t\;iig;+ ;,!:~)~tj,~::w~~i,;e\A.l:",;{J.i'
~:~/~:<;':: I: ~c~>:' :'~.-:
, . f ~ . .,. :.'. I ',. '" ", . . . . . .' ,,' '. ' . , . . . I . .t ' . .
~;y~/,~,,~ .
,\,"
~ ,: c
~ ~, '1
:.l.."
,
"r:-,"
'). ~
;:~ ~:
!~':':;'
'c. ' )'..
"'~i~,~::.:t.,~:r;~~:};:?V)': ':~~:,,::," :';/;~;? '
...,.
,\ 1\""
" l' 'r,~
I.::
~,.J'":
,t\ ;,
IT:,: "
~J~' ::'. .
~~ -:" .
.:- :.
.;~ /j :~l. .
:' I'
~(.'O
Ordinance No. 5557-94 (Cant. from 4/28/94) of the City of Clearwater, Florida,
relating to the land Development Code; amending Section 45.24, Code of Ordinances, to
revise the standards' for the approval of variances; providing an effective date.
~', '"
\" >...
'... '.
'"
',,'
Action:
'Recommended approval.
.~,~\. . 'c
;:::~~: .
II. Approval of Minutes
'--:- .,
{,:."'l
, "
:t'i; ,1 ~,,'. .
tY::,.'
Action:
Approved as corrected.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
1 . Summer Meeting Schedule
IV.,
Adjournment
Action:
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
". ,
"
~. "
. c ,.~
3
05/12/94
c -;
Ii
a - ~ ~- p;r;' -.
~, . r
.. ':,";.
'... >,~ }:, '
;. ~ ; ~., "'
"<j
;,.:-:i ;;')::);L,~'~:L'~~'.f.::+:" ;,;; "",; .:::'.:
" ,
"
." ,~ "0- r.
.' , + ' .,... ,"'," , .'.... '0 to.. ..:...'. .. .~. , : ,:. '.: '~"I:" ". I,,'. . ,~'. .;,,'.' :~.,~~:" .",
~:l~~:::~:' L..
o
(',
~ . '.
~,,:
:.~: '
.,;,i I
t,:-.
~,,:. ~ " r,
, o' .
'. . ~
c, ..
" '
~, .: .
'........
l;:,O~'
;... "
~:: .......
i~?\,:<:,:~' '
.:)'.:"c ' ,
~~~~. . :.' .
,f ~ . ~
"
{'. .
~" T .
\'.-., .
,?~;'.~~ "'c" ..
,-.!-J -
~t~~:>_~,
..~:~~' / .
'~~~ ,:: ". ',,: '. .
.~~ <.: L ,
. ~ '.. .
::;'~~:,~'<':'., '.' .
~~;;H....
u~~~:::~. .': ~.
~ t . .
~t f. .'
~s;"'" , ..,,',
"~"" . .
;~~,' .,~,," "
~.y..~. .'
:f~:~~>.'. ...,
" .~ " "-
. ~......"
>?t.~~Y'.~ , .
,'l' ~. .:. '.' ...
(F,>:':'~" .
DEVELOPMENT CODe ADJUSTMENT BOARD
May 12, 1994
Members present:
Alex Pliska, Chairman
Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chairman
Otto Gans
John B. Johnson
Joyce E. Martin
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney
Scott Shuford, Central Permitting Director
Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1 :00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers
of City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised that anyone adversely affected by any
decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may appeal the decision to an Appeal
Hearing Officer within two weeks. He noted Florida law requires any applicant appealing a
, decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
In'ord~r to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
I.', Public Hearings
1'. David P. Wade & Gail M. Karinja Wade for variances of (1) 7.5 ft to permit a dock
width of- 25 ft where 17.5 ft is permitted; (2) 94 ft to permit a dock length of 119
ft wh,ere 25 ft is permitted~ and (3) 4.2 ft to permit a dock position from an extended
property line of 12.5 It where 16.7 ft is required at 1754 Sunset Drive, North Shore
Park, Blk 11, Lot 4 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential) and
AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal). V 94.19
Central Permitting Director Shuford explained the application in detail, stating the applicant
wishes'to construct a, boat dock and cradle lift for the single family residence in an area on
Clearwater Harbor where extended docks are needed due to the shallow water. He noted the
n'ext'door neighbor has a dock comparable to what is being requested and the City Harbor-
, mas'ter has no problem with the length. Staff felt the application appears to comply with the
, '
: 'standards for approval, will not impact the view of the surroundings and the water depth
justifies the length.
Gail Wade, the owner/applicant, responded to questions, stating a nine by twelve foot head is
,proposed on the north side of the dock opposite the lift and the length is needed to reach water
d_eep enough for recreational purposes.
OCAB Minutes
5/12/94
1
~F~ 1 L .-od --- 4-- fAo~~~1.~_~~ JI" .>''t.~ .'l' .'. "J. '1'> ..', \..,.\ . ",-'". ,,'> ,.' . ',' , ,'. L ". ,. c.~,~ > ~ .,' ...~...c.-.,+r.""V'
.... , " '" ;~.'.,'" ,: :,,:. <'- '.' ,:', , , " ~ ~~l~iit.Wl;~~~r~-t.\:i;~~i1;~':;i"f:}'}~'~!'i"';~;:~:'if:~~;i~rli~'~',i;<~~Ji~i': .,', \";'~~~'hj;(i;f!'~' ,
;~~;,,,,:,,,, ::",,> ",', ."" ' .. . " ' ',' ,', 'Nj~~\l;t1i',~i;f~k'{ll'1f~1i~ it ~~~~t,~
ii~t!;~~!;;;{~t"~;j;a';';!\.':;:i.::.::: ,,';.,, ;', ..... : .. ., ", ... ,.. '" .'"-. .'"" /. ,~~,,' ,,; .""
. ..' " . '..,' ,,' F . ' ", '.' . L. . . . . : " , ' . '.' I .' . ~.
',~' . iI'
,.-........
"'0
" .
,',.a
~c 1.: .
~'.! '. .
'.' ,
"
..' .
,'.
1'.', .'
:', '
Y"
~' " >
,.
:"l~
. ~ "'-iI
Tracy Butler, contractor representing the applicantJ spoke in support of the application. He
stated this proposal is similar to everything else in the area and he also built the dock next
door. He said the dock poses no detriment to the waterway and will be elevated an extra foot
for the environmental health of the seabed.
In response to a question, Mr. Butler stated the length is the minimum necessary to reach water
two to three feet deep and the owner will only be able to use the boat as the tide permits.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant the
variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically because,
the variances arise from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused by the
owner or applicant, in particular, the depth of the water at low tide and the need to get the
boat out further to reach the water subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is
based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including
maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for
a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the 'request
for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. Jay M. Dugan & PhylUs J. Lewellyn for variances of (1) 3 ft to permit a fence and
wall setback of 0 ft for a wall portion from a street right-af-way (Landmark Drive)
where 3 ft is required; and (2) 3 ft to permit a wall portion to provide 0 ft landscape
buffer where 3 ft is required at 2701 Ashwood Court, Wildwood of Countryside, lot
16, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 94~20
Central Permitting Director Shuford explained the application in detail, stating the property was
subject to an FOOT rjght~ofMway taking and the setback is now fifteen feet closer to the home,
at the edge of the swimming pool deck. The permitted wall along the rear of the property runs
parallel to State Road 580 and stops without enclosing the pool. The pool, built before the
applicants owned the property, is shielded by a wooden fence which is to be demolished by
the FOOT. The applicants wish to extend the existing wall, jogging it around the southerly
edge of the pool deck to enclose the pool because extending the wall in line with what is
existing would place it at the water line. The FOOT taking and the pool being built long ago
are felt to be hardships justifying the request. Staff recommended approval subject to two
conditions.
Jay Dugan, co-owner/applicant, noted the street right~of-way in question should be State
Road' 580, not landmark Drive as advertised.
Discussion ensued regarding the application with it being indicated the request is similar to
wans throughout the neighborhood. It was noted a setback variance was denied for another
property in the area because there was room to move the fence back. The subject request is
just for the portion near the pool deck, not for the entire length of the wall.
DCAB Minutes
2
5/12/94
.' ~w..~~oIi.t~4P..:J.."-.;:.J.~tj'-i..\'~.:~'i..~('~c~a~ :.~I'.c ~l\"';":;' 'I...~>~"c,:",:.:} ;:.,,~""..'~>',':..~...:.~.<":ri' .,c~~:\:.~.....,':" to:, ".::.... > ,... f~cf:.~~~:,~
.: . " :., " .. ,:{,^,~"-i'~...~..w;~~):;~~~~",~\,;,~,~,~;'':';';;;:;i~t,;k~';;t~~j.~i.V!;;J~l~.;~ ~;,'~,(:~"'l,.i:~~;1.~;.:~~1o:1:~;'};"'i' 'j"i.~'";;,, ',: ,~~.;;)
:~":."~' :.... ~~::.1; ~:' '. :",<1:..." . ".: ~ . < . . ", -A.,I.; ,,.'\::'~Tl,!;.'~~i"tij~':t'--n,.tS'~"!YI,~~~~j~~;~~';";j~~~:.}~'~.t<~:.~.,:~+l~l;:~
AO' t:"~J1~~"':H...f.l -.
~~:~;':;, >;'/:':~.,<:, ::;";", ,', 0,.
, ,
, . . ". ,. . . .. ,.' . ,. .' ~.'. .' , ,,' . . .... ' . ...: ... :
. r ~
~:. ~ <.
r")
0, '
"
,; .
" ,
: ::
"I.' :
.c".
, '
:"
'/. -:.
",,',0
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant the variances
as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as
listed in Section 46.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically because, the variances
arise from a condition which is unique to the property and are caused by the location of the
existing swimming pool, which requires the three~foot variance for the section abutting the
swimming pool only and the variances are the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship
created by the taking of property by the FOOT for the widening of State Road 680 subject to
staff conditions subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is based on the
application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for a variance.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on the
site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite building permit(s)
shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was
duty seconded and carried unanimously.
3. Murray Sorin/Sorin Realty Corp for variances of (1) 39 parking spaces to permit
a total of 668 parking spaces where 697 parking spaces are required; and (2) 9.5 ft
to permit a fence height of 15.5 ft where 6 ft is the permitted maximum height
behind a structural setback area from a street right~of-way at 2495 Gulf-to~Bay Blvd,
See 18-29-16, M&Bs 42.0.1,42.02,42.08 & 42.09, zoned CG (General Commercial)
and RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential 8). V 94-21
Central Permitting Director Shuford explained the application in detail, stating the applicant
wishes to construct a Builder's Square home repair and retail center. The proposal includes an
outdoor garden center and lumber storage facility~ to be enclosed by a 15.5 foot chain link
fence. The additional fence height is needed to secure and protect the outside storage and
garden area and is common in retail centers of this type. The parking variances are needed for
saving trees; particularly on the west side, of this heavily wooded lot. The six percent
reduction in the required number of parking spaces was not felt to be significant. It was noted
a retail warehouse type of use does not require the same amount of parking spaces as the
standard retail use due to the large amount of internal storage. Staff recommended approval
with three conditions.
In response to questions, Mr. Shuford outlined the preliminary approvals given by the City
Commission and Planning and Zoning Board. He said the final site plan is 'expected from the
developer, in the near future. Mr. Shuford explained the zoning code requires the outdoor
garden sales and display area to be approved through the conditional use process. He
explained non~commercial parking at the rear of the site and agreed a five-foot landscaping strip
may be needed along the east side of the property.
Discussion ensued regarding traffic circulation on the site and staff's concern with eliminating
cut-through traffic from Druid Road and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard.
Concerns were expressed with saving trees being used as the basis for the parking variance
when it did not appear there was adequate effort to save many trees. There was particular
concern with the plan to remove a forty-inch oak tree in the interior of the site and it was felt
more intensive site plan analysis is needed.
DCAB Minutes
3
6/12/94
~.;~~~~-_..7~~--:'''''''''''~..j'':''''~\;;.~~.i~'w.;'';;'I';'~~ ~ '::~";"l;';"-<'.,:~.:,: ~.:; !;;/p;,:;j i';~':'/;~~:)'; ;;.i.;::/:~,;:,~.>.; ',:"",: r,;'-:' ',,~,\:: t;.(::<:;;{::;:~: :'(t;~ ;::~:.." '::,': ",', .,.,: ..:.<,~~~~
\~....';'..{ '. .' ~'.' . ." . '.. . ....' .' co ~ I;' 'p.....lltf1~.I~;; ~~~;::~t9i4~l~~~ii.*"\ti;.WtilV~i~~.~o.~~I+l:.: .::..';'.....c ~~t.
~...../'L~':' '..'.~.: :.;'. '. .... "c ' . .:. >' , -' . . '. .' . '., "<o(~:'~:::r~ ,_t""_.~,-t~~t.;;;.':i...,:';'.r., ~-)...~+,~
, . .' . . 1. . h,' ....., , .'. .,' ,'_ '. :." ' .... I '. , " ~ .
. . ~ ." , .. " . '" : ~ . ~." I.,.. ' . .' '." . ,.' .' ': . ,." ". . ",' :,'..:. ,,' .' . , :.,..,' , .. " . -,.. ;. "': . ."': :. ::,' ..,.,., '. .'
n
o
. "
.f.c
'.:.
, (~
, '-'
~ .' . '
"
t, '
Ed Armstrong, attorney representing the applicant, addressed the Board. He stated an
enclosure is needed to help minimize the impact to the view of the lumber storage and garden
area and a fence will have less impact than a building enclosure.
A question was raised regarding having a landscaping buffer between the pavement and the
fence along the garden area. Mr. Shuford stated none is required by code. However, the Board
felt landscaping is needed for traffic safety and to soften the impact of the fence.
Mr. Armstrong responded to landscaping questians, stating the Sunny Grove Mobile Home Park
has requested buffering along the west side of the subject property. He felt the Florida Power
Corporation would agree ta allow a five.foot landscaping easement along the east side. He
indicated it would be difficult to fit landscaping along the garden area fence because the client
has very specific interior square footage and driveway width requirements. Discussion ensued
regarding various means of providing for landscaping.
Mr. Armstrong stated there was lengthy discussion during the previous two public hearings and
the applicant has worked intensely with staff to configure the site plan to save as many trees
as possible. He said there is no practical way to provide the required parking without
sacrificing some trees. He felt this plan is the best way to deal with the site and noted it
exceeds the tree requirement. Mr. Shuford agreed the only way to save more trees on site is
to require less parking. He noted saving the forty-inch tree would cause the loss of two rows
of parking spaces.
Discussion ensued regarding shifting the parking design to save the forty-inch tree. Questions
were raised regarding the health and specimen status of the trees scheduled far removal. It
was suggested to recess the meeting in order for City Environmental staff to be called.
The meeting was recessed from 1 :55 to 2:08 p.m.
Mike Quillen, Water Resource Engineer with the City's Environmental Management Group,
responded to questions, stating live oaks do well in parking lots. While the three trees in
question are not specimen oaks, they are healthy and he hopes to be able to save all three once
the field work starts. He indicated the geometry of the site is very tight; however, he felt
certain at least two of the trees would be saved. Discussion continued regarding the size,
location and health of numerous trees and the difficulty in pinpointing their locations due to the
scale of the plans.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the possibility of increasing the variance request to anow
fe'wer parking spaces in order to save more trees. Mr. Armstrong did not feel this was feasible,
stating the project cannot be delayed for the amount of time needed to readvertise. He
indicated the applicant is' reluctant to cut down trees and is retaining numerous trees on other
portions of the site. He stressed the project is well within the requirements of the tree
ordinance in terms of number of trees being saved. Mr. Armstrong explained Builder's Square
has standards of floor area and conformation, parking and drive aisles and visibility that must
be maintained. Strong concern was expressed with removing the 40-inch tree to afford a
better view of the building.
DCAB Minutes
4
6112/94
. .,------~~4..~J:~A\....\y,~_>..~:,~hlJ~~,.,\\~ ~~~:.\. ;~,k;,,~_:..~:~':.;.~. .~\'.~~~\..>:;~p~.,1 :~~;.' ,~:~..~~,;.~r:.:'::.~~I~:~/\~:\.,>,.,:i...~.: i1;'~:.;:c11 i'.. : c'.~ , ~ ~:. ~\'.1':.~~~\1~
;t ,I. ,I 1"-' """c~.~';'\1Nl~;4~'f;:J'1,:;,~1.r~\~/~'G.,'~~~1~~f;~rl'1.1~~~'\"1:-":~;~ ,,}.,t... . ~ ~~ :'~ \ :<...c ,.t~~i\~
c . .. ..... .'l".rc ,.'.lt1.':..'.at!~'l..~,.,~:'f9.JP{'":"';;.~..i!.7?~~:;.'~~.~:;.)..:I.~:;P'f:
~il~~!.w...~
2~::,~,',<:, ~\.,';,: i~~..,.~;':~' , , ',,::. ,; :' ' .
'J oJ :.'," ,.~rl ..
n
,
Frank Struchen, owner of the adjacent mobile home park, spoke in support of the application,
stating the applicant has been very considerate in accommodating the park residents. Copies
of a letter in support were distributed to the Board.
..--
Discussion ensued regarding variance #1. Concern was expressed with saving trees being used
as the justification for the parking variance when so many trees are to be removed. However,
it was felt the applicants have made every effort to cooperate and the City should work with
them to get toward the success of this large project. It was suggested to eliminate standard
condition #1 from the motion to facilitate changing the plans to save more trees, if possible.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #1
as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as
listed in Section 45.24 of the land Development Code, more specifically because, the particular
physical surroundings, or topographical conditions of the property involved and the strict
application of the provisions of this development code would result in an unnecessary hardship
upon the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1) the requisite building permit(s) shall
be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing; 2) all protected trees by
size, species, and location shall be shown by the applicant on the final site plan. The motion
" was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "ayen;
Mses. Whitney and Martin and Mr. Pliska voted "nay". Motion faHed.
Discussion ensued regarding how a compromise could be reached to allow this project to go
forward.
'0
Dennis Perry, developer representing the applicant, agreed these are sensitive issues. He stated
Builder's Square is a large national retailer which rarely selects a site which will not support
their typical building plan. He indicated they have made many compromises to make this site
work and this issue could kill the deal. Mr. Perry stated the site survey was done with laser
equipment and is very accurate with respect to the location of the trees. He said he could
commit to saving two of the tree large trees.
Discussion continued concerning the possibility of continuing this item for further study. Mr.
Armstrong repeated two week delay would be a problem for the developer because there is
earnest money at risk.
~.' ,
f".
, In response to questions, Mr. Quillen explained the tree ordinance related to compensating for
tree removal. While extreme concern was expressed with unnecessarily removing trees, it was
agreed this is a good project for the area. It was felt the retailer would provide hundreds of
jobs and this request should not be turned down to save one tree. In response to a question,
the age of the 40-inch tree was not known. Discussion continued regarding saving trees by
allowing fewer parking spaces. Mr. Pliska stated, while he agreed with the motion, he could
not vote to allow the tree to be cut down.
:'::'.'.'
"'
'e'
~ " .
, .
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #1
as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as
listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code subject to the following conditions: 1)
This variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the
DCAB Minutes
5
5/12/94
~w~~...-, .",'.. ,
I ' ' ' ',". .
"'"
.~;~~~~.~.;~.i:..\~~:~~~:~,~t~1.tt;~:~t~.~.'..~~lu,:i~\.:~>~. ~<~:L.' ~J~~t{~~h.\~-: t;~.'.~':~;~:"J'::'~::4~~;'~';"~l~~'; ,:,:~;. ~'~;~',:>: :~:.;:. :~.l.':'~~~I('
. . .' ,; .' . ~' " ':. . . . I' . . 4' . I::... " ". ',' , , " , . :., ,- :.' : '. . . I :...' . ',', '. ':" "" ,.'.. ......, .
o
,0
'\ '
'.
>',l~
.. ...,
applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in
support of the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or
any physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect
with the understandina that some field adiustments may be necessary; 2) the requisite building
permit(s) shaH be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing; 3) all
protected trees by size, species, and location shall be shown by the applicant on the final site
plan and; 4) two out of the three large oak trees designated on the site plan shall be retained
on the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard frontage of the property; to ensure this, the applicant will retain
a professional arborist on the site to ensure viability of the trees in accordance with the tree
protection ordinance and to save the third tree, if possible. If adjustments to the parking lot
are necessary to save any trees consistent with this condition, those adjustments will be made
consistent with City code requirements. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote
being taken, Ms. Whitney, Messrs. Gans and Johnson voted "aye"; Ms. Martin and Mr. Pliska
voted nnay". Motion carried.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variances #2
as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as
listed in Section 45.24 of the land Development Code, more specifically because, the variance
is the minimum necessary to overcome the hardship of protecting merchandise in this very
limited area as indicated on the plot plan subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance
is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including
maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for
a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request
for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite
bunding permit(s) shan be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing;
3) the area on the north side of the garden shop parallel to Gulf~to-Bay Boulevard shall be
landscaped along the fence with shrubbery and trees as wide as possible to the extent that
such can be provided due to the dimensional limitations of the site; and 4) landscaping shan
also be installed adjacent to the east side property line opposite the garden shop and lumber
storage area contingent upon a good faith effort to obtain approval from Florida Power
Corporation. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Ms. Whitney,
Messrs. Pliska, Gans and Johnson voted "ayelt; Ms. Martin voted "nay". Motion carried.
The meeting was recessed from 3:25 to 3:36.
The following Land Development Code Amendments were also considered:
Ordinance No. 5597-94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the land
Development Code; amending Sections 40.489, Code of Ordinances, to establish
new parking requirements for the Bayfront Core, and Eastern Corridor subdistricts of
the Urban Center District; providing an effective date.
Mr. Shuford explained staff has researched the parking options available across the country for
downtown areas. Based on this study, the need for revisions to the current downtown was
recognized. Staff recommended revising the ordinance to allow existing buildings to not be
DCAB MInutes
6
5/12/94
, c,
..
1tm.Y!;!r:A>.;,;!,.,.:t;p;i~$:i:+;w.;...;~,"",,-iJo1""'~
~""""
."..~ ~~--""",,~~,,",..,~"~.~)," :.,..0 ;;,;"".:",,;:,: '~~;";'"i,N",:";'Ll'::;;'.:".,; < "".~:, i'-"~"~;:'~\: \:),,;;, ;::~~i;/~+{;;~J.:~:~~1{;;:\h;:~;,~;~,~~1
- - .
t1::,:L,'. q . .
, ( "
~. \ . , . . '. . ..,.. ., . \ '. ., . . . '." . l' +, . , ,. , .'.. ; ..... .' '. . ..' , .' ~. .' , ,.,' . ' . .:.
\,
~?u/~..; r:':,,:/. ,I " "
o
J.... .
...~ r.
"
~, <
,.',.
:,;,:,'.
. ..
. -I-
,"
........ .
!...,.k. '
:,:::~.~\ ,:: .
J. ;'
...~ '"
~~:: ~~, ,: .
: ~ ... . ,
"
~~~:~~( ,:. ,"
:;~~,'/ :'.
t/::': ,
<')":D'., ,.
I;!: ,,'
:":) ';"
~ ,{,' ..
~'I::: '. . .', .
t{.'" ,'. '.,
04'.>' ,
E):>,,"
~: 1 r:., .
': i :.~. .' .
:;'>.~~:~:.. . "
.,"T'''-'.. ,
1'r:tr : I .
~);.
,r/ ...,
'"
..
~ l.. ~
~ : >: ,i ~ :
.' '
-:<......:,:'
.. 1.
required to provide additional parking beyond what is currently provided, rogardless of changes
in use. Further study of other flexible parking options was also recommended, such as using
offsite parking, linked to public transportation, to meet the standards.
Discussion ensued regarding various aspects of the shared parking issue.
Clarification was requested concerning grandfathering existing buildings. Mr. Shuford stated
they would not be grandfathered for no parking; they would simply not be required to, add
parking the meet the new code.
Mr. Gans moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 5597-94 to the City Commission. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
, Ordinance No. 5613-94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the land
Development Code; amending Section 40.433, Code of Ordinances, to add
n accessory dwellings" as a permitted use in the Infill Commercial District; providing
an effective date.
Mr. Shuford stated this is an incentive for residents to continue to live in their homes and
operate any of the allowable businesses available under this zoning district.
Mr. Gans moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 5613-94 to the City Commission. The
~otion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ordinance No. 5557-94 (Cant. from 4/28/94) of the City of Clearwater, Florida,
relating to the land Development Code; amending Section 45.24, Code of
Ordinances, to revise the standards for the approval of variances; providing an
effective date.
This item was continued from the last meeting to add specific language giving more control
over the approval process.
'Assistant City Attorney Miles Lance stated this version is more restrictive to wide-open
development.
, ,Discussion ensued regarding an applicant having to meet all of the standards for approval to
receive a variance. Ms. Shuford stated an argument for denying a variance can be made if one
or more of the standards are not met.
Mr. Ga'ns moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 5557-94 to the City Commission. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
"II. Approval of Minutes of April 28, 1994
, A correction 'was made to page 1 to reflect that Ms. Whitney abstained from voting on her time
, extension request.
DCAB Minutes
7
6/12/94
~ .". ..' L~L.'l;..jI,1.:"".~~' "",,~ "'~_,'.'""I,...~h. .. ,r, .' -\ ", ',~.".: .... ,.",:'. 'I:. . .,. :.1';..... .~. ,'" .,...r(.;..,. '.:, ',",T~ ;'.' .',"I:~.~
J ~ .;~~~~Uio/;~~~-,..-.-' - -. ; c ' . ~~~11:~.~!,~~t~~~Ci~:,,~~'j~y.;.!;~J~~-.~~g~ii~;~~:~~)f!r;.;, ~~~ <~l.,;{;~~'\i..~.<,.,.::...l'~t'r\:i ~'!~.:';:~ '~~:'~~,'~...~.:':'.~:!';:,~,,:.'.. .' i.,:! ~;..~~"::;l};~,l.~d,
>HI, . -" -.,.,..,. ,-~. 'J:.. y.i\. '0""', 'J,l,>!' '~'k .. '\ .'. '\:.1 ~jJ;i'! i; 'J' - ,-' "" " ,fr;
fJ~'~" ... ~T:j\.." ~. ,~ < ~.~... .....: :': ".': ~ -: .: I. ~ . " . ~ . r. , '" . .,T . V : ~.~~'.~x:. .~~ ~.~^: r~i~'~!~~~~.~~~~):~~~;t.y~lh}.;,~~\f ~'~
Z~i~'~:.?;\~{:'.;~~..'~~h."~~",.::;,,~~,,:. . ,P '.; :.::....';.':.ll~..,::.l.' ..+-;. >~.. ~,~.. ','. . .;; " "... +c,. . . .':.". '.' ,;.\~ ':<-.',J"~:;':,\:,',"~~".'>-": ..~. .~;!
. .' .: ' ; .. .;. '. . . .'.., " . " I " '. : =.. , : " '. . ~ ': ' . r "
~'~'~"'.~ ; :: '
<~
':-:
. ~'r ,
..
,',' .
1.: ,:
\~' .
;~,~. ' .
". ~
;:\.,,'0-
'(~'
..".
f;'/, '
, ,
}<'
':" I .
'"
.:.,.
~ -,~ .
'II,
Ms. Martin indicated she did not vote against the motion for a shorter summer meeting
schedule and requested a correction to the Board Discussion on page 6.
Ms. Martin moved to approve the minutes of April 28, 1994, as corrected. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
1 . Summer Meeting Schedule
Ms. Martin moved to reduce the number of meetings of the Development Code Adjustment
Board from two per month to one per month during June, July and August, for the same
reasons this is done during other months of the year. The motion was duly seconded.
Discussion ensued regarding the motion and Mr. Shuford pointed out eliminating one meeting
a month could cause a two to three-week delay for an applicant and meetings could become
very lengthy. He suggested to weigh the desire to have one meeting against the needs of the
applicants. He stated forty Land Development Code amendments are being processed this
year.
Concerns were expressed that shortening the summer schedule would adversely impact
members who schedule their vacations for other than the summer months. Also, limiting the
number of meetings would concentrate the work load and place a time burden on members
who feel an obligation to personally examine every site. It was felt that Board appointment
, , comes with the understanding there are two meetings per month and the procedure should not
be changed.
>
It was noted meeting times could be shortened by adhering to the established time limit for
presentations. Streamlining the conduct of each case for efficiency was recommended. Mr.
Lance directed attention to Article IV of the rules of procedure dealing with time limits. It was
indicated there are numerous boards which recess for the summer despite the demand for their
time.
""'" . Upon the vote being taken, Mses. Whitney and Martin voted "aye II; Messrs. Pliska, Gans and
;/J.::," 'Johnson voted II nay". Motion failed.
~f/\- Mr. Plisko, and Ms. Whitney stated they would be unable to attend the meeting of
d;,.' May 26, 1994~ It was suggested the members submit their anticipated vacation schedules at
'~i(:,":,::,':':" the'ne'xt meeting.
11.t"~.:: j~> . 'c': "., a
:~\',";:: ,,', " ,IV. Adjournment
}',\,.>';-'" '
~.:~<';;;
I;E..
f;~,:,',', '
.......
:::",:,.{"" ':
.~.;~
, c
~> t ~ ,
'. ~ ' . ~ ,
-':-. '
~},~!~;.'. "
~~~~:~ ."'.. ..:' ,
. .~. .; ......
~ " 1;' T ~.
F', T
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
L()~2
I'
Chairman
Attest: ~
DCAB Minutes Board Re orter
8
6/12/94
~~~~~. ,.
~i~;~~{~~{;':.;'";::,::::;",,l,::.' ::,.,' :..".,:
~ , ~a...I.ii-~:J.t:1~1:l.'{~.i:~;i;<~',!).....I, '..J ",~:c :.~:.:-.'{.. ..:... :"~ ',,:::".: CT'.':'.IIiI.~, :';i'J,.~,;.~.,~~~1-;..:~Th '~'l:~'. 't,f"'/+"/I~ ...... . '.,. .' .:". :;;.J';p;
" , .."" ~ ,r.lQlj;;t,~:..,t+';i;c.!I;:,;-;,'"/~;f~:~,li:~~;!,~_~fj;tA~~!_A,<i:'~'~~,+~'~\\~12~,~';\{}.j\t;i1,l~olJ:~~~~~~l;i;::tit~\::~:~,:~~:":;.fl;" ~ :,~ '..:.:";<:rj....t<
:~'; ~~ < "~~ , ~ '_, ,". ' ,-' -, . ...,'~.' Ok"~. ~:;&~"!'\-:~~ _ :...: 'l~i1{<.,f~~,:!li:'-}~:1/_~.~~:;~!.'t',~, :',.,~', ~f'"
.. ... .: '. ," ".. . ).', .,', .',.' . :.'.... ,,' L +' '. '.' ........ . .'