05/09/1996 (2)
trf;':,:,::.:' )~:' ::::",,' " ,
~:~':;:,::': "
1 ~.. . '
\~;~:' ...' . ,
l~::, .. .
, '
l"- '~: ~
;~, '; ~. . ,
~,: ~,
":'>.\'~'::,,;. "
'0' u .' ,
:/~\~':;::.. '>, .; > :'
'.,: . .- i ., . .' ~.'
!i;.~ (' "': ., >
~!fi<t~ ~":', :', ~~, '
.;."',~: .: ' .
1;:' ~;~.'.' .
"': ," '... ,
~.':"...1~.~.......~~......."..~...~,.. ., ~., ,..\,':'u,.,..,..\" ...,_'
\. . ' ,u,' ,
r' , ' ,
j
i
~\'df.~,~T""'O,,--.j'; ''';'.' . ~ _...,..,.. .
.' t ',,~ ~' ..~ ,~.. '.' 'c' ., .., ,~.d .~'j... "...
I
. ,.. ....~......
"
.~ .-
....... ...~
, ,
I."
r "
I
i'
DCAB
I
!.: "
I ~ ~' .
Development Code Adjustment Board
Minutes
I.. " .
, ;
Date
o
-+
g II
v
. , , < ' , ~, . . . ....~ ., ~. , +. , ~ -- , ' " . . .
r"ol~~7'
"J-. '
r"" "
,,..., DEVELOPMENT CODe ADJUSTMENT BOARD - ACTION AGENDA
Thursday, May 9, 1996
Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation
B. Continued Variance Requests
B1. (Cont. from 4/25/96) L.Q.M.. Inc. for variance of 5.5 ft to permit a structural
setback of 7.5 ft from a side (south) property line at 309 S. Gulfview Blvd, Lloyd-
White.Skinner, Lots 60, 61, 62, 108 and 109, together with part of Lot 107, zoned
CR 28 (Resort Commercia/). VR 96-19
ACTION: Denied with a recommendation for administrative variance approval of one
parking space.
C. New Variance Requests
......~
I i
'-/
C1. Robert H. Lickert for variances of (1) 20.35 ft to allow a lot width of 49.65 ft
where 70 ft is required; (2) 5 ft to permit a structure 20 ft from a street right-of.way
where 25 ft is required; (3) 19.45 ft to allow a'lot width of 50.55 ft where 70 ft is
required; (4) 7 ft to permit a structure 18 ft from a street right~of-way where 25 ft is
required; and (5) 10ft to permit a structure 15 ft from a secondary street right-of-way
where 25 ft is required at 800 thru 810 Vine Ave, Pine crest Sub, Blk 4, Lots 1 thru
12, zoned CI Untill Commercial) and RM 8 (Multi-Family Residential). VR 96-28
ACTION: Approved subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant. including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
C2. ~ames B. & Marlene K. McCuUoUl:1h/Eag'e's Glen Condo Association, Inc. for
variances of (1) 3.5 ft in height to permit a 6 ft high wall where a maximum height of
2.5 ft is allowed within a structural setback area to a street right-of-way; and (2) 2 ft
to permit a wall 3 tt from a street right-of-way where 5 ft is required at
3175 landmark Dr, See 20-28-16, M&B 14.02, See 21-28-16, M&8's 23.04, 23.05,
23.06. 23.08. & 23.13, zoned RM 16 (Multi-Family Residential} & RS 6 (Single Family
Residential). VR 96-29
ACTION: Approved subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of ,the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite '
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
<.....)
DCAB ACTION
1
05/09/96
. i . , , " ," . ... ~ . ~..> . . .' '. "',
~... ':
'-"'_ C3. True School. Inc/d.b.a. Delohl Academy of Florida for variances of (1) 1.5 It in height
to permit a 4 It high fence where a maximum height of 2.5 ft is allowed within a structural
setback area to a street right-of-way: (2) 8 percent to allow 17 percent open space for
the lot where 25 percent is required; and (3) 14 percent to allow 41 percent front yard
open space where 55 percent is required at 1831 Drew St. Skycrest Unit No.5, Blk G.
Lots 1 thru 8. zoned P/SP (Public/SemiPublic). VR 96-30
ACTION: Approved subject to the following conditions: 11 These variances are based
on the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps.
plans. surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance
request. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance
request regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site. will result in these variances being null and of no effect; 2) The
requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; and 3} The applicant shall contact the City Environmental Official to determine
the feasibility of providing the requ;re9 landscape buffer. If determined to be feasible, the
applicant shall provide landscaping in accordance with the recommendations of the
Environmental Official.
C4. John P. Coale & Greta C. Van Susteren for variances of (1) 3.5 It in height to
permit a 6 ft high masonry wall and a 6 ft high wood fence where a maximum height
of 2.5 is allowed within a structural setback area to a street right-of-way; (2) 3 ft to
permit a masonry wall and a wood fence zero ft trom a street right-at-way where 3 ft
is required; and (3) 3 ft to permit zero ft landscape buffer where 3 ft is required at
,..~ 1090 Eldorado Ave, Mandalay Sub, Blk 70, Lot 14 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8
\ I
'- (Single Family Residential). VR 96-31
ACTION: Approved subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based
on the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant. including maps,
plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance
request. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance
request regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; 2) The
requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; and 3) The applicant shall contact the City Environmental Official to determine the
feasibility of providing the landscape buffer within the Eldarado Ave. Right-af-way. and if
determined to be feasible, the applicant shall provide landscaping in accordance with the
recommendations of the Environmental Official.
C5. John G. PowelllPPS .Interests (Computer City) for variances of (1) 5 percent to
allow 20 percent open space for the lot where 25 percent is required; (2) 20 percent
to allow 30 percent front yard open space where 50 percent is required; and (3) 6
parking spaces to permit 84 parking spaces where 90 spaces are required at
25000 US 19 N, Sec. 31-28-16. M&B 44.03, zoned CH IHighway Commercial).
VR 96-32
ACTION: Continued to June 13, 1996
~
DCAB ACTION
2
05/09/96
\ :
f' '" " " \~. , ... . ,J '... ....'... j . , . i . ,
~f\~.: ,~,V~i:" "/:'
. :c ~ " '
(~
C6. Clearwater Nelgbborhood Hovsing Services. Inc. for variances of (,) 9 ft to permit
a structure 16 ft from a street right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (2) 18.46 ft to
allow a lot width of 51.54 ft where 70 ft is required and (3) 234 sq ft to allow a lot
area of 4766 sq ft where 5000 sq ft is required at 1112 Kingsley St, Lakeview
Heights, elk Fi Lot 14, zoned RM 8 (Multi-Family Residential). VR 96-33
ACTIO~: Approved subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
o
C7. Clearwater Neighborhood Housina Services. Inc. for variances of (1) 10ft to
permit a structure 15ft from a street right-ot-way where 25 ft is required; and (2) 1 ft
to allow a lot width of 69 ft where 70 ft is required at 1300 Fairmont St, Betty Lane
Heights Sub, Blk A, Lot 1, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). VR 96-34
ACTION: Approved subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
Minutes Approval -- April 25, 1996-- Approved as submitted
Board and Staff Comments -- Discussion continued to a full board
Adjournment -- 2:35 p.m.
\..)
DCAB ACTION
3
05/09/96
."1.
\.,.1"
\--:- ',1 .;-" , ,~
"
~
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
CITY OF CLEARWATER
May 9, 1996
Absent:
William Schwob
William Johnson (arrived 1 :02 p.m.)
Mark Jonnatti
Roberle Pratt
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Sandy Glatthorn, Manager
Gwen Legters
Otto Gans
Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Assistant City Attorney
Central Permitting
Board Reporter
Chair
Present:
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1 :00 p.m. in City Hall, followed by the
Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. He outlined meeting procedures and the appeal process.
Ms. Pratt was introduced and welcomed as a new member.
To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
B. Continued Variance Requests
f:ir;l\
~~~,
B1. (Cant. from 3128, 4111 & 4125196) L.O.M.. Inc. for variance of 5.5 ft to permit a
structural setback of 7.5 ft from a side (south) property line at 309 S Gulfview Blvd,
L1oyd-White-Skinner, Lots 60, 61, 62, 108 and 109, together with part of Lot 107,
zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). VR 96-19
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the board approved two
variances at the April 25 meeting. The three board members present were deadlocked on
the third variance and it was continued to today's meeting. It was not felt conditions
support this variance, as granting the setback would restrict the view corridor of the
properties to the rear. Staff did not recommend approval. It was indicated three letters of
objection were attached to the board packets.
Steven Fowler, architect representing the applicant, did not wish to postpone this
issue to a full board, indicating the applicant wants to get the project started. He gave a
brief history of the subject property, surrounding conditions and board action to this point.
He 'felt the plan before the board today is a good solution to board and neighbor concerns.
He explained two reasons for the request are the geometry of the site and the desire to
orient the proposal to Gulfview Boulevard, instead of in an east/west configuration. He felt
it was important to present to the public an attractive building face instead of a parking
lot. Responding to concerns about an existing six foot high concrete block wall along the
south side property line, he stated they are working with staff and the property owner of
the adjacent hotel as to the ownership of the wall.
I
J
One adjacent resident spoke in opposition to the request. She gave a history of the
wall ownership, construction, height and configuration. She supported removal of the wall
she felt was unsightly, asking that it be replaced with a three or four foot tall barrier to
mdc05a.96
1
05/09/96
, '"
. ' ;, . f. '.' .. ' '~.'.' " '.'. ' . j , ....' " ~ ' . , ~ . ., I .' '. . ,
,
I
I
:'if.\ . ~ " "
, .-....
discourage pedestrian traffic through that area. She said she was happy with the building
plans shown to her last week.
No written or vorbal support was expressed.
Mr. Fowler responded to the citizen, stating if it is determined the wall belongs to the
applicant and is no longer required to separate residential from commercial areas, they will
be happy to tear it down and replace it with a barrier to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. In
response to a question, Mr. Fowler estimated 253 square feet of building space will be lost
if the variance is not granted. He has been talking with Central Permitting Director Scott
Shuford about the possibility at administratively granting a variance tor one parking space
to recoup 400 square feet of restaurant space on the north side. If granted it would allow
in increase of the north building four feet to the east. still meeting the rear setback
requirement.
Board discussion ensued. One member agreed the wall should be removed because young
people have been observed gathering and loitering there in the evenings. He felt this will be an
attractive commercial development and was inclined to grant the variance. Two members
disagreed, feeling the need to pay attention to the carefully established setback requirements.
All indicated an inclination to support an administrative variance for one parking space. It was
pointed out the board's rules do not support cumulative approvals. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the
applicant is not precluded from applying for an administrative variance and it would be
considered at the discretion of Mr. Shuford.
t-'\
...-"
Member Jonnatti moved to deny the variance in Item B1 as requested, because the
applicant has not substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24
of the Land Development Code. Discussion ensued regarding the recourse for the applicant if
this request is denied. The motion was duly seconded. Members Schwab, Johnson, and
Jonnatti voted "Aye"; Member Pratt voted "Nay." Motion carried.
Unanimous consensus of the board was to recommend that staff consider
administrative approval of a one parking space variance to accommodate the lost square
footage resulting from the denial of the variance.
C. New Variance Requests
C1. Robert H. Uckert for variances of (1) 20.35 ft to allow a lot width of 49.65 it
where 70 ft is required; (2) 5 ft to permit a structure 20 ft from a street right-at-way
where 25 ft is required; (3) 19.45 ft to allow a lot width of 50.55 ft where 70 ft is
required; (4) 7 ft to permit a structure 18 ft from a street right-at-way where 25 ft is
required; and (5) 10ft to permit a structure 15ft from a secondary street right-of-way
where 25 ft is required at 800 through 810 Vine Ave, Pinecrest Sub, Blk 4, Lots 1
through 12, zoned CI (lntill Commercial) & RM 8 (Multi-Family Residential). VR 96-28
\~
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating construction of eight
homes is proposed on the eastern portion of the subject property. The request is consistent
with the development pattern of the neighborhood and staff recommended approval with two
standard conditions.
mdc05a.96
2
05/09/96
. . ~' .... . \ '. l . (, . ~.'.. . ' , . I , .. t > , . . " . >" ,,', .
;.~., I, \
::;((
~
, "
Randy Mears. representing the applicant, stated this two acre parcel is designed to match
and promote the neighborhood feellng of the surrounding properties, in tune with Clearwater
Neighborhood Housing Services (CNHS) recommendations. In response to a question, he said
he will build the homes.
Jerry Spilatro. Assistant Executive Director of CNHS. welcomed Ms. Pratt to the board.
He spoke in favor of this opportunity to build new homes for low and moderate income
families. He said they have built more than 60 new houses in the North Greenwood
neighborhood and ten in south Clearwater. They are always aggressively seeking new lots on
which to build. He said the lot sizes are standard for the neighborhood and many homes in
their plan books will fit and look well on a 50 foot lot. One member commended Mr. Spilatro
and CNHS for doing a good job on a rec~ntly completed project at the corner of Myrtle Avenue
and Marshall Street.
In response to questions, Mr. Spilatro said the majority of the homes are 1,200 to 1,250
square feet with a variety of room configurations. Prospective homeowners are educated on
budgeting and maintenance, and CNHS monitors their progress. He said the original homes
built on Fairburn Avenue five years ago are still being well maintained. He noticed neighbors
tend to show more pride in their homes wherever CNHS homer are built. The board agreed this
is a worthwhile project.
No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed.
\'....~'~ Member Johnson moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant
""l~ 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) These variances are based
on the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps,
, plans. surveys. and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance
request. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance
request regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site. will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The
requisite building permit{s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C2. James B. & Marlene K. McCullough/Eagle's Glen Condo Association, Inc. for
variances of (1) 3.5 ft in height to permit a 6 ft high wall where a maximum height of
2.5 ft is allowed within a structural setback area to a street right~of-way; and (2) 2 ft
to permit a wall 3 ft from a street right-ot-way where 5 ft is required at
3175 Landmark Dr, See 20-28-16, M&8 14.02, See 21-28-16, M&8's 23.04, 23.05,
23.06, 23.08, & 23.13, zoned RM 16 (Multi-Family Residential) & AS 6 (Single Family
Residential). VR 96-29
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the applicant proposes to
construct a bridge across a pond to provide access from Landmark Drive to new home sites on
the east side of the pond. The variances will allow construction of six foot high security fences
and walls to provide an entry feature at Landmark Drive and secure the area west of the pond.
J
mdc05a.96
3
05/09/96
. . . . " '. , ',' ~{ r -' ". ~' ~. : .' . '. . ! > - . <, '.' , ~. ,
..;:~~' '.'
~~l ,
.-.. James McCullough, the applicant and project developer, stated the bridge will access this
upscale development of 21 lots. The bridge and walls were proposed as an elegant and
attractive alternative entrance to the subdivision. The bridge is currently under construction.
He said bronze plaques will decorate the entry feature and a decorative gate on the bridge will
provide subdivision security. The proposal is about 22 feet back from the sidewalk, so it does
not appear to crowd the right-of-way. The landscaping and wall height and design will match
and blend with the surroundings. He said bath were designed to look like a continuation of the
adjacent Turtle Brook development. In response to a question, it was indicated a four foot
black aluminum fence at the rear will not be seen from Landmark Drive and is not part of this
request.
Member Jonnatti moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as'listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to the following conditions: 1} These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site. will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
..1'~ .......
I...t'....~)
ca. True School. Incld.b.a. Delphi Academv of Florida for variances of (1) 1.5 ft in height
to permit a 4 ft high fence where a maximum height of 2.5 ft is allowed within a structural
setback area to a street right-of-way; (2) 8 percent to allow 17 percent open space for
the lot where 25 percent is required; and (3) 14 percent to allow 41 percent front yard
open space where 55 percent is required at 1831 Drew St. Skycrest Unit No.5, Blk G,
Lots 1 through 8, zoned PIS? (PublicISemiPublic). VR 96-30
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the applicant wishes to
replace a deteriorated chain link fence protecting the children from Drew Street traffic, and
construct a new concrete sidewalk to improve a walkway on the site. Staff noted while
relatively small, the variances further reduce already nonconforming open space. As the
parking lot does not conform to landscaping requirements, it was recommended the applicant
work with staff to ascertain whether space exists to remove some of the existing parking lot
pavement to provide a landscape buffer adjoining Drew Street. This would improve the
appearance of the property and replenish some of the open space. Staff felt conditions support
the request and recommended approval with three conditions.
Sandy Adair, Headmistress of the Delphi Academy, reiterated the proposal outlined by
staff. She said they would like to plant trees along the new sidewalk to improve the building
and lot.
Member Johnson moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant
has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the
Land Development Code. subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based
on the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps,
J plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance
mdc05a.96
4
05109196
. . . I . I"'" .';. . .\...' 't. ". > ~ . . , . ' , . .'~ , : .. ,~.._
,,tl' .
"-', request. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance
request regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; 2) The
requisito building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; and 3) The applicant shall contact the City Environmental Official to determine the
feasibility of providing the required landscape buffer. If determined to be feasible, the
applicant shall provide landscaping in accordance with the 'recommendations of the
Environmental Official. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C4. Jotl" P. Coale & Greta C. Van Susteren for variances of (1) 3.5 ft in height to
permit a 6 ft high masonry wall and a 6 ft high wood fence where a maximum height
of 2.5 is allowed within a structural setback area to a street right-of-way; (2) 3 ft to
permit a masonry wall and a wood fence zero ft from a street right-of-way where 3 ft
is required; and (3) 3 ft to permit zero ft landscape buffer where 3 ft is required at
1090 Eldorado Ave, Mandalay Sub, Blk 70, Lot 14 and riparian rights, zoned RS 8
(Single Family Residential). VR 96-31
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the applicant wishes to
enclose the front yard of the new home with a security fence and wall. It was indicated the
building on the neighboring property to the south extends forward of the masonry wall and
proposed wood fence, diminishing visibility and negating any adverse effects that would
otherwise occur. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with
three conditions.
J .,..........\
.~-"';
Member Jonnatti declared a conflict ot interest, stating he is the architect for this
project. The Chair announced that unanimous approval of the three remaining
members was needed to grant the variances. The applicant chose to proceed today.
Jake Bruynzeel, representing the applicant, stated Ms. Van Susteren is a television news
celebrity who needs privacy and security tor her home. Mr. Bruynzeel referred to photographs
in the board packet and presented additional photographs of conditions on the subject property
and surrounding area. He reviewed the location of the fence and wall, stating the wall will
shield from view the unsightly rear wall of the yacht club. It was indicated the proposal is
located in an area removed from public view, has limited traffic access, and will not negatively
impact other property.
-...-I
Member Johnson moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to the following' conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys. and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; 2) The requisite building
permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing; and 3) The
applicant shall contact the City Environmental Official to determine the feasibility of
providing the landscape buffer within the Eldorado Ave. Right-at-way, and if determined to
be feasible, the applicant shall provide landscaping in accordance with the
recommendations of the Environmental Official. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
mdc05a.96
5
05/09/96
., ' '~ , ~ 0 . " ~ .' " . .' " . ....
of: ~~,.. ,
/~ '
--
"
eG. John G. Powell/PPS Interests (Computer City) for variances of (1) 5 percent to
allow 20 percent open space for the lot where 25 percent is required: (2) 20 percent
to allow 30 percent front yard open space where 50 percent is required; and (3) 6
parking spaces to permit 84 parking' spaces where 90 spaces are required at
25000 US 19 N, Sec. 31-28-16, M&B 44.03, zoned CH (Highway Commercial).
VR 96-32
In a memo dated April 26, 1996, representative Todd Pressman requested a continuance
to the next meeting to allow time to discuss and clarify issues with staff.
Member Johnson moved to continue Item C5 to the meeting of June 13, 1996. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
CG. CI~arwater Neiahborhood HousinQ Services. Jnc. for variances of (1) 9 ft to permit
a structure 16ft from a street right-at-way where 25 ft is required; (2) 18.46 ft to
allow a lot width of 51.54 ft where 70 tt is required and (31 234 sq ft to allow a lot
area of 4766 sq ft where 5000 sq ft is required at 1112 Kingsley St, Lakeview
Heights, Blk F. Lot 14. zoned RM 8 (MultiwFamily Residential). VR 96-33
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the applicant proposes to
develop the Jot with a single family home. Staff felt conditions regarding setbacks and
relatively small building size support the request and recommended approval with two standard
conditions.
(:~.>
E.J. Robinson, representing the applicant, described this Infill housing program as a
partnership between the City and CNHS to construct homes for single parent families. He said
conditions in blighted areas have been improved tremendously by the program and he has
processed about three-quarters of a million dollars worth of loans in the past three months.
Jerry Spilatro said this program is publicly funded and he recently filed a report that about
$4 million worth of property have been put on the tax rolls by this agency. He tries to place
famities in 25 to 30 new houses per year. He has about 70 clients in the process of getting
financing and approvals to build. with 40 more an a waiting list.
In response to a question. Mr. Robinson said this applicant is a single mother with two
children, ages 7 and 9. The board felt the proposed location near a beautiful park, within
walking distance of many facilities, is a wonderful place for children to grow up.
Member Jonnatti moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant. including maps, plans.
surveys. and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
'......,I The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
mdc05a.96
6
05/09/96
+ .. ~ . '. ' , , ,'..,. ,i . { " \ . . '.
~{. ,: .'
" "
C7. Clearwater Nelohborhood Housiml Services. Ine. for variances of (1) 10ft to
permit a structure 15 ft from a street right-of-way where 25 ft is required; and (2) 1 ft
to allow a lot width of 69 ft where 70 ft is required at 1300 Falrmont St, Betty Lane
Heights Sub, Blk A, Lot 1, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). VR 96-34
Ms. Glatthorn presented written background information, stating the home proposed for
this corner lot will be larger and will not comply with setback requirements as do other homes
in the neighborhood. It was indicated the lot is not small and staff felt a conforming home
could be designed or selected to fit comfortably without variances. Staff felt the application
does not appear to comply with three of the four standards for approval.
t;;,~~
E.J. Robinson, representing the applicant, stated this would be the tirst Infill house in this
section of the neighborhood and they are eager to get underway. In response to questions
regarding the apparent oversizing, he explained the size of the house and lot are selected
according to the applicant's ability to pay. This applicant is a single mother of two children and
qualifies for a larger house. He said she specifically selected this neighborhood, lot and house
plan, and will have no other. In response to a question, he said reducing the square footage
would destroy this floor plan, and the house would not fit on a 50 foot lot. It was pointed out
the house will be overpriced for the neighborhood, and the view of the garages across the
street is not attractive. Mr. Robinson indicated the applicant is adamant this is where she
wants to live. He stated, while there is no way of knowing how long someone will stay in a
given location, this is her first home, she can afford it, and felt It would be a good investment
for her. He explained they have a very good track record with their new homeowners. He
could think of only two instances where the homeowners have not been successful. It was
indicated pride in ownership is a strong incentive.
Jerry Spilatro stated he was not aware of staff's concern regarding the size of the house
on the Jot. He felt fortunate to have a larger lot available for this homeowner. He said they
usually have to accommodate a larger home on two lots. He does not like to do this, when
those two lots could be used to place two families. He said the house presents itself well on
the site. Staff has indicated the proposed new home aligns with only one other home.
One member felt a smaller house would not be the best use of the property and was not
concerned about varying setback. In response to a question, he said the proposal will upgrade
the neighborhood.
'---I
Member Jonnatti moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land
Development Code, subject to the following conditions: 1) These variances are based on
the variance application and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's variance request.
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the variance request
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure located on
the site, will result in these variances being null and of no effect; and 2) The requisite
building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
mdc05a.96
7
05/09/96
. r < '.. ' , . > . ., ~ , , '. . .I,l
~!~~~(\:!<~:~:: '0'< I.;~,.~~.l.
r-, "',;,;;':;: ::'.~ ',' :
> ,
. , ','..',
.. ,','
,',
'; ,':~:tt
,.--.
Minutes Approval -- April 25, 1996-- Approved as submitted
Board and Stoff Comments
Member Schwob extended best wishes for speedy recov~ries to Mr. Richter and Mr.
Gens. He thanked Ms. Glatthorn for her service as planning official today.
Member Johnson requested questioned the address and telephone numbers of staff's
new location. Ms. Glatthorn reported the new Municipal Services Building (MSB) is located
on the northwest corner of Myrtle Avenue & Pierce Street. Public parking is on the east
side of the site. The. new telephone number for the Central Permitting Department is
562-4567. Mr. Johnson expressed concern the old number was disconnected without
reference to the new number. Ms. Glatthorn indicated staff is working to correct this
oversight.
Ms. Dougall-Sides said discussion items regarding the board's rules of procedure, the
lobbyist registration ordinance, and ex parte communications were continued to a full
board. She recommended deferring these items until all five members are present. In
response to a question, she affirmed the amendments are being proposed for the lobbyist
ordinance.
Member Schwob acknowledged Member Pratt, stated she is a welcome addition to the
board.
() Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m.
T!!~~
Development Code Adjustment Board
. '
-..J
mdc05a.96
8
05/09/96
FORM 86 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUr\jICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
I.AS I ~,"'M F.. liltS 1 J'i^M r -MlllDI1" N o\MI' :-',''''11. OF IIOAllll, l,'OlJ:\CIL. t'UMMI:>!.lO:-', AU I HUll 11 '1', Olt ('OMMt 1"111
t"""JtiNNt<<t1 K Pal mr CJl~ ADJ~ ~t?
. 'MAlI,LNG AOURESS
~11t; ~VA\ V r\DUAvJ f7P 6
l'LI \'
CAJ5/:wWJ~ tto~ rA
'I HE nOAMI>, rOLJNCII~ COMMISSION. AUI 1I0KI r" OK l'OMMJ n fE ON
WIlICII L SEK Vt IS A UNIT Or:
~nl'l' 0 (,OllN'I" 0 OTIIEIl.I.(l("^I.^Gn-:n'
COlIN 1'1'
*6tl
/,;MtE OF l'OLllIeAI. SlIIlIlIVISION:
tf~-
Ft~
61
UAl t: 0:-; WIlK... VOl E OI,"('Ull.llnl
t;,l7)rt7J(b
MY l'USl110N LS: I
o El.I:eJ"JVE
rI AJ'l'OINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
V\\a.u
VR qft; - 3(
This rorm is ror use by Ilny person serving at the COUllty, cilY, or other locallevc1 or government on an appointed or elected board,
council, commission, nUlhorilY, or comlllillee. It applies equally to members or advisory and non.advisory bodies who arc l>rescntcd
with a vOling connict or i11lerest under Section 112,3143, Florida Statutes. '
. .
Your responsibilities under the law when raced with a measure in which YOll have a connict of interest will vury greatly depending
on whelher you hold an elective or appointive position, For lhis reason, please pay close alienI ion to the instructions 011 lhis form
before completing lhe reverse side and riling the rorm.
I "''''\ INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143t FLORIDA STATUTES
. ,
'-
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ADST AIN from voting on a measure
which inures to his special private gain. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibiled from knowingly vOling on a measure
which inures to lhe special gain of a principal (othcr than a government agency) by whom he is rctained (including the parent
orgl1.nization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he is relained); to the special private gain of a relative; or to the special
, private gain or a business associate. Commissioners or community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and
officers of independent special tax dislricls elected on a,onc-acre. one-vole basis are not prohibited from vOling in that capacity.
For purposes or this law, a "relative" includes only lhe officer's father. mother, son, daughter. husband. wire, father-in-law, mother-in-
law, son-in-law. and daughler-in-Iaw. A "business associatc" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on u business
enterprisc with the officer as a partner, joint venlurer, coowncr or property, or corporatc shareholder (wherc the shares of the
corporation arc not listed on any nalional or regional slock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above. )'ou must disclose lhc connic!:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly Slating to the assembly the nalure or your interest in the mcasure on
which you arc abst.'lining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this rorm with the pcrson responsible for
recording the minutes or the meeting. who should ineorporale thc form in the minutes, .
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However,
you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making uny attempt 10 innucnce the decision, whether orally or in writing and
. whelhermadehyyouoratyourdirection. .,'. . ,. , ,'....., .",
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY AlTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH
THE VOTE WLL BE TAKEN:
I" . .'.!
U · You must completc and file this form (berore making any attempl to innuencc the decision), with the person responsible, for
.', rc~~rding the minutes or t,he meeling, who will incorporate the form in t~e minut~s. " ." '. : . ~. t ': ') , . :
. A copy or the (onn must be provided immedialely 10 the 01 her members of the agency. ,.,; ,I t,. ,
_ .,., ,The fonn mUsl be read publicly al the next mecting after the rorm is filed.
:.
, CE FORM 88.10-91
,\,
IF YOll MAK E NO A1TEM I'T 1 n 1:-;1:I.UE~CE 'III E DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION ,\"1' Tit E f\.ll:ETI NCi:
, .,
· You must disc\o~e omlly, the na\\ITf \If )Ti\lr conflict in the n1C:\~lIrl' lx-forc panidp.lIlllg., .
· You must comrlet!: the form IInd file- it within 15 day~ af\er till: vote occurs with tht' pcm;n tcspull~ihk fur rcc~lfding the min;l~,
the meeting, who must incorromte the fmlll ill the minutes. A corY of lhe form IllU~t he pHlvidcd immedialely to the olher
",cmbers of the agcncy, lInd the form must be read publicly ntthe l1e:\t mecting after the fMlll is tiled, .
. '
1 .
"
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTE;REST
I,~ AI JoNNkf\i
, hereby disclosc Ihat on
~
.19_:
(a) A measllre came or will come before my ngency which (check OIlC)
_ inured to my special private gain;
_ inured 10 lhe special gain of my business lIssociate,
_ inured to lhe :;pecial gain of illY relali\'e,
L inured to the special gain of ~ Ct7x..e f:N'P Gt~ ~ ~~
whom I am retained; or
_ inured to lhe special g;lin of ,
is the parent organit'ation or subsidiary of n principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nalure of my connicling interesl in the l1leasure is as follows:
. by
, which
\ i<M ~f CoM~~ Mah18;tv~ qpf-{){c.eS
TV~ 1t\f; flBStP-6NCf; ~-o IN -rHt~ ffPUCf(\7t}J
/'
\..~......~.
\I ~ q<o ...;;(
Dale Filed
/~~.
Signalure
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317 (1991), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQkiD
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION. REDUCTION IN
SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR ^ CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000.
CE FORM SD. 10.91