11/09/1995 (2)
/~:~"i;:', ~ ~'~'.:~ ~' : .
;'/ '\~~:;.J)
, > '. ~> ~~
c "
, ,.', 'I
, ,
, "
.;.
I>:.j ,
'...,
:' ~ : [ .
I i: ~':~. .
~, ,
'~~ ',.',' .:' '..
'.'
'; ,~" .
I. "
'"
.. ~ ',!' ~, ,.
"
.. i~ I . i '
, '
, ,
~\~,~N~'t.~;: ",:';~ ;::,~':'; ',"';": ".", ,,\~~,':: :'[~;~>,::;i "'."<:'?'.':~::'-:'::'\ ,: '><,: ',',: <": , ',' " "; ;:" . " ..,', "..'...."",
. .~ " ,'. t \ '. ~. . .. ~ ... :"...' . ~',' ,_ ,..,.
...-~ "\
-.j ,
DCAB
Development Code Adjustment Bo~rd
Minutes
Date
"
o
f-/;1 S /
..",., ~
y
..' "' .
t~(}'::\',' · '
~ .. .'. '
~
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD - ACTION AGENDA
CiTY OF CLEARWATER
Thursday, November 9, 1995 ~ 1 :00 p.m., City Hall
Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation
Variance Requests
1. JacQueline S. Latimer for variances of (1) 13 ft to permit a swimming pool 12
ft from a street right.of~way where 25 1t is required; and (2) 10ft to permit a
garage addition 15 ft from a street right-of~way where 25 ft is required at
1050 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Sub, Blk 68, Lot 13, zoned RS 8 (Single Family
Residential). V 95~53
ACTION: Continued to the meeting of January 25, 1996 at the request of the
applicant.
~
'C7J'
2. HBE Florida Corooration (Adam's Mark Caribbean Gulf Resort) for variances of
(1) 44.5 ft to permit a bandshell to remain 5.5 ft from the Gulf of Mexico
where a 50 ft setback is required, (2) 7 ft to permit sundries hut to remain 43
ft from the Gulf of Mexico where 50 ft is required, and (3) 9 ft to permit
bandshell to extend 9 ft seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line,
where no structure seaward of the control line is allowed at 430 S. Gulfview
Blvd., Lloyd White~Skinner, lots 33, 34, 35, and part of Lot 36. zoned CR 28
(Resort Commercial). V 95-55
ACTION: Granted variance #1 for 35.5 feet to permit a bandshell 14.5 feet
from the Gulf of Mexico and #2 for 7 feet to permit d sundries hut 43 feet
from the Gulf of Mexico, 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 for the sundries hut shall be obtained within thirty
days from the date of this public hearing; 3) the requisite building permit for
the bandshell shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public
hearing: and 4) it is suggested that, prior to finalizing repairs to the existing
bandshell's foundation, the applicants consult with interested parties such as
representatives of the neighbors at 440 West Condominiums and the Police
Department and submit a letter to this effect, with the building permit
application. Denied variance #3
y
DCAB ACTION
1
11/09J95
"
l\ .'.;' ,f., :', '1
I.,&~j!" :,'. ", .',
f~::r:::,:',:," ';.
.....; .','
~ .; . '..;
..
;. ' : :;, ~..:, ,
~ .. !
~
3. Daniel W. Cockerham for a variance of 25 ft to permit a structural setback of
zero ft from a street right-of-way; where 26 ft is required to allow a room
addition at 1735 Sunset Drive, North Shore Park, Blk 7, Lots 10, 11, 1 2, an~
part of Lot 13, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 95-56
ACTION: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) This
variance ;s 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 at no effect and
2) the requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within six months from the
date of this public hearing.
Time Extension Requests
'(~ '
1 . Garv H. & Marv l. Dworkin for variances of (1) 3 ft to permit a structural
setback ot 22 ft from a street right-ot-way (Magnolia Drive) where 25 ft is
required; (2) 11ft to permit a structure 4 11 from a rear property line where 15
ft is required; and (3) 5 percent to permit 40 percent of open space for the lot
where 45 percent is required at 415 Magnolia Drive, Harbor Oaks, part of Lots
78 & 80. zoned RS-6 {Single Family Residential.) V 95-27
ACTION: Granted a six month time extension to May 25, 1996
Approval Of Minutes - October 26. 1995 ~ Approved as submitted
Board And Staff Comments - Discussion
Adjournment - 2:40 p.m.
"
'-.....J
DCAB ACTION
2
11/09/95
, I ' "" ,.. . ,I ' ." . .
';1- _
t';:'"
.~
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
CITY OF CLEARWATER
November 9, 1995
Present:
Alex Plisko
Otto Gans
Joyce Martin
William Johnson
William Schwab
Leslie Dougall.Sides
John Richter
Gwen Legters
Chair
Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Assistant City Attorney
Senior Planner
Board Reporter
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1 :00 p.m. in City Hall, followed by the
Invocation and Pledge at Allegiance. He outlined meeting procedures and the appeal process.
To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
Variance Requests
1. JacQueline S. Latimer for variances of (1) 13 ft'to permit a swimming pool 12 ft
from a street right-at-way where 25 ft is required; and (2) 10ft to permit a garage
addition 15 ft from a street right-of-way where 25 ft is required at 1050 Bay
Esplanade, Mandalay Sub, Blk 68, Lot 13, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V
(~) 95-53 '
Attorney Harry Cline requested a continuance on behalf of the applicant. He stated the
parties interested in this application are not able to appear together until January 25, due to
schedule conflicts.
Member Schwob moved to continue item V 95-53 to January 25, 1996. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. HBE Florida Corooration (Adam1s Mark Caribbean Gulf Resort) for variances of
(1) 44.5 ft to permit a band shell to remain 5.5 ft from the Gulf of Mexico where a 50 ft
setback is required, (2) 7 ft to permit sundries hut to remain 43 ft from the Gulf of Mexico
where 50 ft is required, and (3) 9 ft to permit bandshell to extend 9 ft seaward of the
CCCL (Coastal Construction Control Line), where no structure seaward of the control line
is allowed at 430 S. Gulfview Blvd., Lloyd White-Skinner, Lots 33, 34, 35, and part of Lot
36, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 95-55
Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, staff recom-
mendations. He stated the applicants are requesting variances for two existing structures to
remain in their present locations on the hotel deck. He detailed conditions on the site and
noted the structures were placed without building permits. The sundries hut is small and has
minimal impact on the site. The band shell is situated to deflect sound away from the
condominiums to the south and does not adversely affect any view of the Gulf. Staff
supported approval of the variances with three conditions.
mdc11 a.95
1
11/09/95
. . , ,
, ,
. ", \'.... ' '" , ,"\ ~, , .-
t'...:'t
'~ .
Staff comments indicate locating the band shell seaward of the CCCL requires
approval of two variances by the DEP (Department of Environmental Protection.) After
reviewing the proposal, the City Building 9fficlal felt placement of the band shell seaward
of the CCCL does not pose a safety hazard. Encroachment into the setback from the Gulf
of Mexico requires another variance approval from the BAA/SF.
In response to a question regarding a new section of six foot wood fence on the site,
Mr. Richter stated a nonconforming wood fence may be repaired without bringing the
entire fence into compliance. It was thought the fence has existed for almost ten years.
Tom Montgomery, the applicants' representative, verified the existing section of new
fence was built to repair damage by Hurricane Opal. Mr. Montgomery stated, in response
to noise complaints from the neighbors in 440 West Condominiums, the applicants con-
tracted a sound survey by a professional consultant. As a result, the band shell was
moved to its current location and orientation for the best possible noise mitigation. He said
readings were taken before and after the move and show a marked decrease in decibel
levels, which are within a normal range. Referring, to two presentation boards, Mr.
Montgomery displayed photographs and a drawing of the existing layout.
(~':<Jl
'1"t-,7
One member stated the Police Department measures decibel levels in response to
noise complaints and questioned the maximum allowable decibel level. He thought maxi.
mum noise levels were set for the Holiday Inn Surfside and questioned what standard they
use. Mr. Richter said the Code refers to loud and raucous noise, not to a numerical stan~
dard. This was confirmed by the Assistant City Attorney.
Discussion ensued regarding placing the band shell across the CCCL. The Board did
not feel this to be necessary and discussion ensued regarding alternatives. Mr.
Montgomery stressed their findings show the current location is the best for noise mitiga~
tion. He said any adjustment would allow more noise to bounce off the hotel toward the
condominiums. Mr. Montgomery said he reviewed the application with a certain State
official, who indicated administrative approvals would be granted if DCAB approved
today's variances. One member was troubled by this statement, indicating the referenced
State official has denied similar requests in the past.
It was pointed out the band shell is on skids and can be moved. That was the reason
the applicant gave for not originally permitting the structure. Mr. Montgomery said some
concr~te slab repair is necessary since Hurricane Opal and he consented to reexamine
placing the band shell behind the CCCL in conjunction with the slab work.
Bill Bretches, General Manager of the Adams Mark Caribbean Gulf Hotel, spoke in sup-
port of the application. He said they are trying to create an aesthetic amenity for guests
while being responsive to the needs of the community. He stated; after the band shell
was moved to its present location in 1991, noise complaints decreased 600 percent and
have continued to decline. He said he is currently negotiating band contracts and would like to
know soon if decibel limits are imposed, so he can write them into the contracts.
, -....J
mdc11a.95
2
11/09/95
.... .. .,' '>,
, . ' ~ ..... .., ", . .,
.~ .
Samuel Vaszquez and Gary Tikriti, 440 West Condominiums property manager and
resident, respectively, spoke in opposition to the request. Mr. VaszQuez read two letters
from residents stating they did not feel the band shell provides a suitable noise buffer. One
letter detailed noise level measurements used by traffic engineers; the other suggested the
band shell be relocated to the northwest corner of the hotel deck. Mr. Vaszquez noted the
number of noise complaints crossing his desk has declined and he felt very few residents
still feel the noise level is unacceptable. Mr. Tikriti explained it is not the overall volume,
but the booming bass vibrations that continue to disturb him until 10:00 p.m. every even-
ing. He said the bass level is not diminished by noise buffering. He complained his
frequent telephone calls to the hotel office have done nothing to reduce the problem.
Mr. Bretches responded to the opposition, stating he will address the bass concern. He
said he usually switches to a two piece band at this time of year and the situation should
ease as the music moves 'to the upper deck restaurant area. . Mr. Montgomery expressed
concern the decibel numbers referenced in the first letter are not valid for his operation.
He said he will instruct and monitor the bands to ensure they are not playing too loudly.
In response to a question, Mr, Montgomery said moving the band shell involves very
little cost or effort. He restated his wiJljngness to reevaluate the band shell location.
1,:._', )
Discussion resumed regarding hours of operation and conditioning variance approval to
offset noise concerns. One member felt the hotel management should consult with the
'neighbors and the police to keep the music within acceptable levels. Another member
pointed out that heavy traffic and 'outdoor entertainment are normal conditions of life on
the beach. A third member felt a compromise to accommodate both the property owner
and the neighbors was reasonable.
Member Gans moved to grant variance #1 for 35.5 feet to permit a bands hell 14.5
feet from the Gulf of Mexico and variance #2 for 7 feet to permit a sundries hut 43 feet
from the Gulf of Mexico, 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, special circumstances exist, related to the particular physical surroundings, that
are peculiar to such land or buildings and deserve special study, 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 submit-
ted in support of the applicant's request for variances. 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 the vari-
ances being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit for the sundries hut shall
be obtained within thirty days from the date of this public hearing; 3) the requisite building
permit for the bandshell shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public
hearing; and 4) it is suggested that, prior to finalizing repairs to the existing band shell's
foundation, the applicants consult with interested parties such as representatives of the
neighbors at 440 West Condominiums and the Police Department and submit a letter to
this effect with the building permit application. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
'-"
mdc11 a.95
3
11/09/95
, , ' , ' " , ' ' .I ' ,'. ,
, , ,
I'
.>\o.j j,'
\ :c.
" ~. Member Gans moved to deny variance #3 as requested because the applicant has not
substantially met all the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, more speclficalJy because: 1) no special circumstances exist related
to the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions applicable to the
land or buildings. or such circumstances are not peculiar to such land or buildings and do
not apply generally to the land or buildings in the applicable zoning district; 2} the strict
application of the provisions of the code would not deprive the applicant of reasonable use
of the land or buildings; 3) the variance is based exclusively on a desire for economic or
other material gain by the applicant or owner; and 4) the granting of the variance will not
be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the land development code and will
be materially injurious to surrounding properties or otherwise detrimental to the public
welfare. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
3. Daniel W. Cockerham for a variance of 25 ft to permit a structural setback of zero
ft from a street right-of-way; where 25 ft is required to allow a room addition at
1735 Sunset Drive, North Shore Park. Blk 7, Lots 10. 11, 12. and part of Lot 13,
zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 95-56
Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing. staff recom~
mendations. He stated the applicant is reapplying for a variance that was already
approved, and for which the time limit expired. The proposal to construct a second story
addition directly over an existing garage has not changed. No diminishing of open space is
proposed and no changes in the neighborhood have occurred.
':'~~'.
\
.........~".)
In response to a question, Mr. Richter stated the existing structure is nonconforming
with reference to the street right-of-way. A variance is needed to construct a second
story addition to an already non-conforming structure. Discussion ensued regarding
whether a Unity of Title was filed and if it is necessary. Ms. Dougall-Sides stated a Unity
of Title is not on file at this time and she did not feel it is legally necessary in this case.
She suggested alternatives more appropriate to the proposal. such as administrative lot
division or additional conditions prohibiting conversion to a multi-family dwelling.
Mr. Cockerham, the owner/applicant. stated completion of his project was delayed
when the builder took a trip out of the country. then Mr. Cockerham lost track of time and
his variances expired. He said he is only requesting the same thing as before. He affirmed
the property is all under one title.
Member Schwob moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has
substan,tially 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
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 this variance being null and of no effect; and 2) the requisite building
permit(s) shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
./
mdc11 a.95
4
11/09/95
for:',:;',:"':' :
,'. \\::';:
, ~ , ~
..-,
/' "
Time Extension Requests
1. Garv H. & Marv L. Dworkin for variances of (1) 3 ft to permit a structural setback
of 22 ft from a street right-ot-way (Magnolia Drive) where 25 tt is required; (2) 11 ft
to permit a structure 4 ft from a rear property line where 15ft is required; and
(3) 5 percent to permit 40 percent of open space for the lot where 45 percent is
required at 415 Magnolia Drive, Harbor Oaks, part of Lots 78 & 80, zoned RS-6
(Single Family Residential.} V 95-27
Member Pliska questioned if he was allowed to vote on the extension as he declared 8
conflict of interest at the original public hearing. Ms. Dougall-Sides indicated Member
Plisko may vote as this is a procedural issue.
Member Gans moved to grant a six month time extension to May 25, 1996. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Minutes Approval - October 26, 1995
Member Johnson moved to approve the minutes as submitted in writing to each
member by the Board Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously
Board and Staff Comments
I ...:...\
'.J
Discussion ensued regarding variances being granted for construction seaward of the
CCCL. Concern was expressed with recent approval by the BAA/BF to build a house
across a buried seawall. The placement of the seawall in relation to the CCCL was not
known. A question was raised regarding whether the DCAB should have jurisdiction. Mr.
Richter was reQuested to investigate. Instances of other variance approvals seaward of
the CCCL were cited.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 2~40 p.m.
, tZ ~~t
Chair
Development Code Adjustme t Board
Attest:
~W&~t4-J
Bcfurd Reporter J
mdc11 a.95
5
11/09/95
i
1
't
~
t
;'
{.
~:
\
V