01/08/1998 (2)
"' 1 0 " ' J. . . _ ,','.:: ','., . ' , .'. ' , . . .'
, ,
T~;:':'S~-~; .'
. r t' ~: ~ " . e ~ e,~' .
,"".".'
~.:" p.',
. :~ .
\ ,
/~
.-;o",>#J
(
; ,
I,'"
" '
!~: ~T
, ,
-.:.
, .....,.
,t .'
t..,. '
DCAB
..
.~;, ~
{;r,: ,<: ;'
,I'
,:'"Devel()pment COile Adjustment Board.
Minutes
1<.,..
~';;:, .. "
tt\j)\, .
~if~':I, "
,:!~::.:
{.:,-
t1:~' ...
~s,}: '-t" '.~~
~;;
t' ,~'. J ' .
Dat
<6.: '19C/
'.J,
,~ ..' ~.
<..:;', ....
~. " :
, '
.'
t' .
. .
I
!
'f
I
!
.:'
'.-:.'
',.
, ,
\ ':r' e
r ".
i
~
"
"
.'.
"
,0"'11I'
, ,
,!
~y
~~~l-ijl,~t\'.,.i,n'~~.f:""'~j1~.... ~.1 ~';o'W".""~"*' ).....i...:"'-I,...~~..:'..
J:"\{~.:~~"...~'_</ ~:"..;.. ~.. !.Le i : ._.', >;
',~. . "T"~"'~ .....,1' rJ;,~.,~... OJ'..
- \ . ~ .....:. ~. },
. '. '.e ' ~
. - :,: \ ~\
.." .
"." 'I,'
. , '
"~ T. '.,'," .,:",..."..',.,' '.'.. ,'I,',":'" } , , . . ~ ., . ,_ r ..
, ,'.' ",. :>,h,:;'<,,:;,;:,/::)~-t;:';;~::i\':
,-,
~."
p' '~"'i[
r '
\
'...I..'}N,.
.-.J
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD - ACTION AGENDA
Thursday, January 8, 1998
Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, and Invocation
B. Continued Variance Requests
B1. (cont. from 12/11/97) Helen A. & Paul A. & Marv H. GeleD for the following variances (1) a
parking variance of 1 space to allow zero spaces where 1 space is required; (21 a building
coverage variance of 10 percent to allow 85 percent where a maximum of 75 percent is
required~ and (3) an open space variance of 5 percent to allow zero percent where a
minimum of 5 percent is required at 30/32 Papaya St. & 442/444 Mandalay Ave,
Clearwater Beach Park, Lots 80-85, zoned CB (Beach Commercial). V 97-74
ACTION: None -- withdrawn by applicant
C. New Variance Requests
C1. Andrzei &' Zofia Kuloa for the following variances for a proposed new home at 900
Bruce Avenue; (1) a structural setback variance of 5 ft to allow a setback of 20 ft from
the Bruce Avenue right-of-way where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required~ (2) a
structural setback variance of 10ft to allow, a setback of 15ft from the Kipling Plaza
right-of-way where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required~ (3) a structural setback
variance of 5 ft to allow a setback of 20 ft from the Eldorado Avenue right-of-way
where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required; (4) a lot width variance of 5 ft to allow
a lot width of 65 ft where a minimum width of 70 ft is required; (5) a lot depth
variance of 38 ft to allow a lot depth of 72 ft where a minimum of 110ft is required;
and for a proposed new home at 904 Bruce Avenue; (6) a structural setback variance
of 5 ft to allow a setback of 5 ft from the Bruce Avenue right-at-way where a
minimum setback of 25 ft is required at 900 & 904 Bruce Ave, Mandalay Sub, Blk 20,
Lots 1 & 2, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-01
ACTION: Denied
C2. Barbara & Mark Birenbaum for a variance of 1 ft in fence height to permit a fence
height of 7 ft where a maximum fence height of 6 ft is allowed at 1448 Rosetree
Court, Rosetree Court, Lot 9, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-02
ACTION: Granted subject to the following conditions: 11 This variance is based on the,
application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including ~aps,
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 one year from the date of this
public hearing.
,
l
i
\
I
I
I
DCAB ACTION
1
01/0Bf98
.', I'.
~
C3. James Michael & Mortise Hoe McDaniel for the following variances (1) a setback
variance of 21,2 ft to permit a 2nd floor addition 3.8 ft from the southerly right-of-way
line of Eldridge St., rather than the 25 ft setback requiredi (2) a setback variance of 18
ft to permit a 2nd floor addition 7 ft from the westerly right-of-way line of Eldridge St"
rather than the 25 ft setback requiredi and (3) a setback variance of 5.75 ft to permit a
2nd floor addition 4.25 ft from a rear property line, rather than the 10ft rear setback
required at 301 Eldridge St., Eldridge Town House, Lot 1 together with submerged land
to West, zoned RM 16 (Multiple Family Residential). V 98-03
ACTION: Continued to the meeting of January 22, 1998
C4. Sophia & Bill V. Stathopoulos (Da Franco Pizza Inc. I for a variance of 4 parking spaces
to permit a 650 sq ft restaurant expansion to allow zero additional parking spaces
where 4 additional parking spaces are required at 1969 Drew St., Sky Crest Unit No.
7, Blk K, Lot 1 and part of Lot 2, zoned CG (General Commercial). V 98-04
~
r:~
ACTION: Granted 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 effecti and
2) The requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this,
public hearing.
C5. William M. Shepard. Trustee (Lagoon Resort) for the following variances (1) a clear
space variance 62.8 ft to allow a clear space distance of 15 ft where a distance of
77.8 ft is required; (2) a setback variance of 62.8 ft to allow a building 15 ft from
the Westerly side property line where a minimum setback of 77.8 ft is requiredi
and (3) a front yard open space variance of 9.9 percent to allow 40.1 percent
where a minimum of 50 percent is required at 619 S. Gulfview Blvd., See 17-29-
15, M&B 22.01, Bayside Sub No.5, Blk C, Lots 1.5 and riparian rights, zoned CR
28 lResort Commercial). V 98-05
-.J
ACTION: Granted 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 effecti 2) The
requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; 3) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall contact Central
Permitting staff to review tropical seascape design criteria proposed for Clearwater Beach.
As part of this design review, the applicant and City staff shall consider means to utilize
the sidewalk in front of the street level shops as an activity area, such as a sidewalk cafe,
to increase the level of interest along the public sidewalk; and 4) The applicant shall work
with the Traffic Engineering Department to reach an amenable traffic flow situation on site.
DCAB ACTION 2 01/08/98
,
I
. i
" ,
,..' '"'.J ,.'
,'." ,,'"
, /., '," < ' . ' ! '
. l' . r) '~l.
, " e
:,,', '1 '
, '
"
:i,,"
,.'
;,. .
~ (. ,.
I ~,
0"
',.~
"," ....
. "/'
CG. Golda Melr Center. Inc. (Helen's Bakery)for 'a variance of 5 parking spaces to permit
establis~ment of a retail use where 5 additional parking spaces are required at
3065. Jupiter Ave., Skycrest Sub Unit A, Blk A, part of Lots 7 &,8, zoned CG
(General Commercial). V 98-06
,l
ACTION: Granted 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 perm~t(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; and 3) The variance is contingent upon use of the property as a non-advertised
business on a wholesale-only basis.
, 'Minutes Approval -:- November 13 and December 11, 1 997 -- Approvf!d as submitted
Board and Staff Comments -- Discussion
Adjournment - 5:50 p.m.
, !
I
,
. ,,.,.:It
"
'.:..,.: ..".
"
,
,
"
"
'!I
I
,
I
i
i
'I
.;, -~,.,\
, ,-."J
, DCAB ACTION
3
,
01/08/98
, ,.
Present:
Otto Gans
William Schwob
William Johnson
Mark Jonnatti
Ron Stuart
Leslie Dougall-Sides
John Richter
Gwen Legters
Chair
Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Assistant City Attorney
Senior Planner
Board Reporter
".
~
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
CITY OF CLEARWATER
January 8, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 1 :00 p.m. in City Hall, followed by the Invocation,
Pledge of Allegiance, meeting procedures and explanation of the appeal process.
To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
B. Requests for Extension, Deferred and Continued Items
~".
;.t...
e ~. "
,.......
, '.>..
.
B 1. (cant. from 12/11/97) Helen A. & Paul A. & Marv H. Geleo for the following variances
(i) a parking variance of 1 space to allow zero spaces where 1 space is required; (2) a
building coverage variance of 10 percent to allow 85 percent where a maximum of 75
percent is required; and (3) an open space variance of 5 percent to allow zero percent
where a minimum of 5 percent is required at 30/32 Papaya St. Be 442/444 Mandalay
Avenue, Clearwater Beach Park, Lots 80-85, zoned CB (Beach Commercia!). V 97-74
In a letter dated December 19, 1997, variance request V 97-74 was withdrawn by the
applicants' representative.
C. New Variance Requests
C1. Andrzel & Zofia Kuloa for the following variances for a proposed new home at 900
Bruce Avenue; (1) a structural setback variance of 5 tt to allow a setback of 20 ft tram
the Bruce Avenue right-at-way where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required; (2) a
structural setback variance of 10 1t to allow a setback 01 15ft from the Kipling Plaza
right-at-way where a minimum setback ot 25 ft is required; (3) a structural setback
variance ot 5 tt to allow a setback of 20 ft from the Eldorado Avenue right-at-way
where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required; (4) a lot width variance 01 5 1t to allow
a lot width of 65 ft where a minimum width at 70 1t is required; (51 a lot depth
variance of 38 1t to allow a lot depth of 72 ft where a minimum of 110ft is required;
and for a proposed new home at 904 Bruce Avenue; (6) a structural setback variance
of, 5 ft to allow a setback of 5 ft trom the Bruce Avenue right-at-way where a
minimum setback of 25 ft is required at 900 & 904 Bruce Avenue, Mandalay Sub, Blk
20, Lots 1 & 2, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-01
~
mdc01a98
1
01/08/98
.:. ......'.:~.".:.:.:...\..,: '::...,,~.'\'.:.. ..'~:...'... ", .~...\'....".\;.: ;L'......~'.:. ,,",+", ...,',. ....'.,.\,..' ....... ','.' <':'t"'~":"'" ...'.,,~~"..,...:~:';.. ~..'.I.."
, . '
')
Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations,
detailing the property's location, configuration, and setback requirements. The applicant
proposes to replat two contiguous lots, increasing the size of the southernmost lot. A new
home is proposed for each lot. While many homes in the area do not meet setback
requirements, 'staff felt the setback request on the north side of Kipling Plaza was
inconsistent with other homes in the area. With the exception of variance request #2, staff
felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with three conditions. In
response to questions, discussion ensued regarding history of non.conformlng setbacks for
existing homes in the vicinity. Existing setbacks were estimated, and flood elevations
discussed.
Ralph Holjes, the applicant stated he chose this parcel for building homes for himself,
his wife and daughters, because the parcel was affordable. The homes will meet minimum
flood elevation standards.
!I;;':'!)
~::.-,:~
In response to questions, it was indicated the line separating the two lots will be
redrawn to decrease the size of the northern lot, increasing the southern lot. He has not
discussed his plans with neighbors. Size of the southerly house could be reduced to
provide staff's recommended 206foot setback from Kipling Plaza, providing his daughter
agrees. Board members expressed concern the proposed homes are too large for the lots.
Questions were raised whether consideration was given to designing homes to fit the lots
without variances, or to lots more suitable for the houses. Mr. Holjes indicated the home
planned for the southern lot is minimal in size and all his daughter can afford. Both houses
would be addressed to Bruce Avenue because the high rise buildings block the view to the
west. His wife has located another lot suitable for their home.
No verbal or written support was expressed. Five persons spoke in opposition to the
request citing concerns with encroaching into the existing narrow setbacks, overbuilding
the lots, creating a congested situation, setting an unwanted precedent, requesting
numerous variances when others have built to code without variances, obstructing the
view, destroying palm trees, restricting open space, adversely affecting surrounding
property values, taking advantage of the situation by trying to build two homes on a lot
priced for building one home, and failure to meet any of the standards for approval. It was
felt the corner property is a neighborhood landmark, and the applicant should be looking for
more suitable lots in his price range. Discussion ensued regarding construction of a
conforming stilt home in the viCinity without variances. One man stated he came forward
with a similar proposal for the subject property several years ago, but was turned down. It
was felt a zoning change for the whole neighborhood would be more appropriate than
granting the subject request. Six letters were submitted in opposition to the request.
Mr. Holjes responded, discussing lot width, cost effectiveness of constructing two
homes on the lot due to its cost, his plans for a stilt house, alignment of the southerly
house with adjacent houses, and absence of adverse effect on the community. He did not
understand the reference to the site as a landmark.
Board discussion ensued regarding the proposal. It was felt the standards for approval
do not support the request. While constructing two homes on the site might be more
economically feasible, it was felt construction of only one home would be better for the
,~
mdc01a98
2
01/08/98
~j":'''
, , "r~
~r'-{..-
Barbara Birenbaum, the owner/applicant, affirmed the need for a higher fence due to
the fact her home is at least four feet lower in elevation than the adjacent properties. A
wooden shadowbox fence is proposed. Her family loves Clearwater and plans to stay in
the home.
~
neighborhood. Concerns were expressed with granting the request in ,view of
overwhelming opposition. Discussion ensued regarding whether the applicant would have
reasonable use of his land without variances. It was indicated the smaller lot would be
unbuildable if sold separately. A question was raised whether the board is obligated to
grant variances to build on lots too small to be developed. Ms. Dougall-Sides responded
such a decision is at the board's discretion. One member noted lot size variances are
frequently granted when lots in an entire neighborhood are generally non-conforming, but
this is a case where conforming homes exist.
Member Johnson moved to deny V 98-01 as the request does not meet all the
standards for approval. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C2. Barbara & Mark Birenbaum for, a variance of 1 ft in fence height to permit a fence
height of 7 ft where a maximum fence height of 6 ft is allowed at 1448 Rosetree
Court, Rosetree Court, Lot 9, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-02
Mr. Richter presented background information, written staff recommendations,
property location, existing development and current conditions. As adjacent lots to the rear
are two to three feet higher in elevation than the subject property, the applicants propose
to replace an old six foot wood fence with a new seven foot fence to obtain a degree of
privacy in their back yard.. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended
approval with two standard conditions.
~
Two letters from adjacent property owners were submitted in support of the
application. No verbal or written opposition was expressed.
Member Schwob moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to the following conditions: 11 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 one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C3. James Michael & Maroee Hoe McDaniel for the following variances (1) a setback
variance of 21.2 ft to permit a 2nd floor addition 3.8 ft from the southerly right-of-way
line of Eldridge St., rather than the 25 ft setback required; (2) a setback variance of 18
ft to permit a 2nd floor addition 7 ft from the westerly right-of-way line of Eldridge St.,
rather than the 25 1t setback required; and (3) a setback variance of 5.75 ft to permit a
'2nd floor addition 4.25 ft from a rear property line, rather than the 10ft rear setback
required at 301 Eldridge Street, Eldridge Town House, Lot 1 together with submerged
land to West, zoned RM 16 (Multiple Family Residential). V 98-03
mdc01a98 3 01/08/98
One person spoke at length in opposition to the application, stating the proposal will
worsen an existing parking problem in the congested area and restrict emergency vehicle
access. She complained the applicant has fenced public right-of-way as part of his yard. It
was indicated addition of a second story will partially block the view, the proposed height
is too tall for the surroundings, the aesthetic design is out of character with the English
style townhouses across the street, visitors frequently park illegally in four parking spaces
reserved for townhouse residents, and economic gain will result for the applicant.
~
Mr. Richter presented background information, written staff recommendations,
property location, development, and setback requirements. The applicant proposes to
expand the existing single family home by adding a second story the same size as the first.
Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with two standard
conditions. In response to questions, it was Indicated except for the addition of twelve-inch
second story support columns, the footprint will not change. The variances are needed
because the existing setbacks are non-conforming. It is not known how the home came to
be built without variances. It was not known why the development was called Eldridge
Town House, when the zoning is single family.
Steve Fowler, architect representing the applicant, related a brief zoning and land use
history of the immediate area. He displayed drawings of the site showing the lot layout,
parking areas, and locations of the required support columns around the building's
perimeter. He stated the original concrete foundation pilings are inadequate. subject to
erosion, and must be replaced with new pilings. Elevating the addition will allow space for
air conditioning equipment below.
..:<::,~~
t.~~l..~,
'j.,':
Discussion ensued regarding proposed use of the new rooms, configuration of the
parking area, and concerns emergency access would be restricted by vacating the utility
easement. Mr. Fowler responded to questions, stating the high point of the roof will be 22 .
feet, measured from the east elevation. The footprint will stay exactly the same, except
for the columns, and the addition will double the floor space. Mrs. McDaniel wishes to
maintain the aesthetic integrity of the original oriental design. A set of stairs in the rear are
planned to replace stairs blown away in a recent storm.
Mr. Fowler submitted for the record one letter of no objection from an adjacent
property owner, and two letters from GTE expressing no objection to vacation of the utility
easement. Seven letters were submitted in opposition to the request. The meeting
recessed from 2: 5 5 to 3: 11 p.m. to allow time for the board and applicants to read the
letters.
v
Board members suggested posting signage, contacting City code enforcement
personnel, and calling police regarding parking violations. In response to a concern about
the public hearing notification procedure, it was indicated legally adequate notice was given
to surrounding property owners. Mr. Fowler addressed concerns expressed in the letters,
stating additional parking will not be needed because Mr. McDaniel is no longer a practicing
attorney, safety will not be compromised as the footprint is not being enlarged with the
exception of exterior columns, the structure will not encroach into surrounding parking
spaces, and no change in the pavement will result. Additional family members may move
in, but the home will remain a single-family dwelling and no additional kitchen facilities will
mdc01a98 4 01/08/98
~
(~U;J~
f:t;~
~
be Installed. A wet bar is planned in the media room upstairs and kitchen countertops are
being replaced downstairs. A fence was built and landscaping installed along the right-of~
way after several unsuccessful attempts to get the City to address adverse conditions in
that location. Discussion ensued regarding height calculations and use of a single family
dwelling in a multi-family zone. Mr. Fowler corrected earlier testimony concerning a
stairway between decks on the southwest corner of the home.
Board members felt it was not unreasonable to grant variances to allow one-foot
support columns. However, concerns were expressed with granting variances for a project
receiving significant neighborhood opposition. Concerns were expressed code requires only
two parking spaces for a single family home. regardless of its size and number of
occupants. Discussion ensued regarding open space calculations, increasing a non-
conformity, parking space size, location, numerical requirements, and ways to create more
parking. Mr. Fowler requested a continuance to allow time to talk with the seven
townhouse residents regarding their concerns.
Member Schwab moved to continue this item to the meeting of January 22, 1998 to
give the applicant an opportunity to discuss the situation with the neighbors and possibly
reach a compromise. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C4. SODhia & Bill V. Stathopoulos (Da Franco Pizza Inc.) for a variance of 4 parking spaces
to permit a 650 sq ft restaurant expansion to allow zero additional parking spaces
where 4 additional parking spaces are required at 1969 Drew Street. Sky Crest Unit
No.7, Blk K, Lot 1 and part of Lot 2. zoned CG (General Commercial). V 98-04
.
Mr. Richter presented background information, written staff recommendations, and
parking requirements. The applicant proposes to expand an existing pizza restaurant into
adjacent space formerly occupied by a flower shop within a strip shopping center. No
opportunity exists on the property to provide the required additional parking. Staff felt
conditions support the request and recommended approval with two standard conditions.
Vince Longo, the applicant, said he is expanding the restaurant to provide more seating
for his customers' convenience. He has permission to use the adjacent Skye rest Animal
Clinic parking lot after hours.
No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed.
Member Jonnatti moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code. 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
permitls) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
I
I
l
I
I
I
\
}
f
t
~
mdc01a98
5
01/08/98
'r)
C5. William M. SheDord. Trustee (Lagoon Resort) for the following variances (1) a clear space
. variance 62.8 ft to allow a clear space distance of 15 ft where a distance of 77.8 ft is
required; (2) a setback variance of 62.8 ft to allow a bUilding 15ft from the Westerly side
property line where a minimum setback of 77.8 ft is required; and (3) a front yard open
space variance of 9.9 percent to allow 40.1 percent where a minimum of 50 percent is
required at 619 S. Gulfview Boulevard, See 17-29-15, M&B 22.01, Bayside Sub No.5, Blk
C, Lots 1-5 and riparian rights, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 98-05
Mr. Richter presented background information, written staff recommendations,
property location and current development of the motel property. The applicant proposes
addition of a four-story parking garage with ground level shops and a five-story addition for
use as a nightclub, banquet room, and 14 new motel units. He related clear space,
setback, and front yard open space requirements. Staff felt conditions support the request
and recommended approval with three conditions.
, j.~;;a
., f~~'I:~~
I"z:..
Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, provided a brief history of the existing
59-unit motel, its other uses, and neighboring uses. He stated a five-story building is
consistent with the surroundings. Special circumstances justify the variances because
existing development has non-conforming side setbacks and little clear or open space. The
applicant is substantially increasing front yard open space over what currently exists. He
discussed the net parking increase proposed, needed because Shepard's is a destination
point. He presented an aerial photograph of existing develop on the subject and
surrounding properties. While economic gain is a factor weighed with every commercial
application, the applicant is not adding revenue-generating uses. The proposal will not be
materially injurious or substantially harmful and no impact will result. Absence of side
setbacks and open space is typical for properties in the vicinity.
Architect Steve Fowler displayed a conceptual drawing of the expansion, proposed to
accommodate weddings, banquets, a service area, improve emergency vehicle access,
eliminate front parking, and add landscaping. He provided elevation dr~wings of the
parking structure, pointing out aesthetics, functional features. and four ground floor service
shops to support the hotel use. A net increase of 128 parking spaces is provided. In
response to questions, he demonstrated location of the 14 hotel units in relation to the
screened service, dumpster and walk-in freezer areas. He submitted a panoramic
photograph of the front of the existing property. General discussion ensued regarding the
proposal. "
No verbal or written support was expressed. Two persons spoke in opposition to the
request, expressing concerns with late public hearing notification, failure to comply with
standards for approval, blocking view to the water from street level and from adjacent
motel rooms, increased noise, and the negative impact of large crowds driving customers
away from surrounding businesses. Discussion ensued regarding locations of the guest
room wing and parking garage, and their potential impacts on view for the adjacent motel
property. Concerns were expressed the proposed structure is configured to fill in the open
spaces of the property. The board's authority to vary clear space was questioned. Ms.
Dougall~Sides responded code provides the board may not vary density, but the restriction
-)
mdc01 a98
6
01/08/98
~
does not include clear space. She noted dimensional non~conformities are different from
. non-conformities of use.
Discussion ensued regarding history of variance requests for the subject and
surrounding properties. It was not known whether the proposal will g'o before the Planning
and Zoning Board.
Responding to the opposition, Mr. Cline stated the applicant is not maximizing floor
area ratio, density, or overbuilding the site. The proposal is a reasonable attempt to deal
with an existing market and problems associated with the establishment's success. The
speaker system will be redesigned to direct music downward and inward, rather than
toward the residential area. The impact on the neighbors' view is not extreme. Containing
more of Shepard's customers onsite will produce a positive impact on the community. The
proposal is consistent with what many feel is appropriate on the beach. The opposition
reiterated Shepard's does not need variances to enjoy reasonable use of the land. Mr.
Cline maintained the variances are to serve the people who are already coming to the
establishment.
(~~~~
In response to questions, Mr. Cline stated improvement of the motel facade is not
needed currently, but will be addressed when needed in the future. Valet parking will be
available and the parking structure can be open to the public when not in use by Shepard's
patrons. Concerns were expressed with lack of a site plan. A Traffic Engineering
Department recommendation not to grant variances prior to development of a site plan was
referenced. Mr. Cline expressed surprise, in view of the large number of meetings
conducted with City staff. He said the applicant received no traffic input until two days
ago.
Lengthy board discussion ensued regarding the issue. Questions were raised regarding
which City officials support the proposal and how it fits with immediate and long range
plans for City-wide improvements. Concerns were expressed with the concept of creating
a miniature "Ybor City" on Clearwater beach. Questions were raised regarding police
department reaction to the existing and proposed establishment. Discussion ensued
regarding the relative merits of a private parking facility in the area. One member pointed
out the police issue is beyond the scope of the board and the noise issue can be handled
administratively. While concerned about variances to clear and open space, he was
inclined to support the proposal due to staff's indication it is moving in the right direction
for the beach. .
0"'"
-J
Member Jonnatti moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land
Development Code, 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{st shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public
hearing; 3) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall contact Central
Permitting staff to' review tropical seascape design criteria proposed for Clearwater Beach.
mdc01a98
7,
01/08/98
.'
As part of this design review, the applicant and City staff shall consider means to utilize
the sidewalk in front of the street level shops as an activity area, such as a sidewalk cafe,
to increase the level of interest along the public sidewalk; and 4) The applicant shall work
with the Traffic Engineering Department to reach an amenable traffic flow situation on site.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
J
C6. Golda Meir Center. Inc. (Helen's Bakery) for a variance of 5 parking spaces to permit
establishment of a retail use where 5 additional parking spaces are required at
306 S. Jupiter Avenue, Skycrest Sub Unit A, Blk A, part of Lots 7 & 8, zoned CG
(General Commercial). V 98.06
Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations,'
stating the applicant proposes to acquire the smaller of two existing buildings on the
subject property to operate a wholesale bakery. Staff felt conditions support the request
and recommended approval with two standard conditions.
,',
Lovro Vrbos, the applicant, stated he wants to operate a small Mom & Pop style
wholesale business for his wife. Mrs. Vrbos will bake products to order and Mr. Vrbos will
deliver the merchandise to stores and produce stands. They will not have retail or delivery
traffic onsite. Ms. Dougall-Sides noted retail sales are a permitted use at this location and
Mrs. Vrbos had indicated during her appearance before the Planning and Zoning Board that
incidental retail sales might occur.
I,
I,
'''),~'
t ,,",
~t~.t
No verbal or written support was expressed. An attorney representing the adjacent
property owner to tha south, stated his client owns two rental properties behind her single
family residence immediately adjacent to the subject property. She vigorously opposes
locating a business with no parking provision two feet from her property, as bakery
customers are certain to park in her driveway.
Mr. Vrbos responded the bakery operation will differ from the former beauty shop
'operation where customers did not know where to park. He will have no customers
arriving to create parking problems. He will respect the neighbor's property. In response
to questions, he said they will not advertise the business and will not sell to the public.
The applicants have been looking for an affordable property in an appropriate size and
zoning district for three years.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposal. Suggestions were made for decreasing the
impact of having no onsite parking. In response to questions, it was indicated the two
parking spaces in the right-of-way belong to the City and would not be affected by sale of
the larger lot.
Member Schwob moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has
substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land
Development Code, 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
..J
mdc01a98
B
01/08/98
~~':e:.,
t.~',,:,:
/, '1J~
:> {'-w}J
::~>' ~..i
/~. j) /J I) , J
..//~".d!(,CL.PI4' /)t 1~/i::J~
Chair ,-.i' / "
Development Code Adjustment Board
.. . ," I'. t ..~>.(:: !'.~<~~'
::~r<.""<>:>"::,",t, "
"
, "
.1 '+
~ t.'
,\
'"
"
"
, .
o
the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) The requisite building
permlt(s) shall be obtained within one year from the date of this public hearing; and 3) The
variance is contingent upon use of the property as a non~advertlsed business on a
wholesale-only basis. Members Gans, Schwob, and Johnson, voted "Aye;" Members
Jonnatti and Stuart voted "Nay." Motion carried.
Minutes Approval - November 13 and December 11, 1997
Member Johnson moved to approve the minutes as submitted in writing to each
member by the Bo~rd Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Board and Staff Comments
Mr. Gans reported the deck at Britt's restaurant is enclosed with plastic, adding 60
. seats to the restaurant. He stated the situation is an insult to the beach. Staff, will
investigate.
, Adjournment
The meeting adjourned' at 5:50 p.m.
'.:0
mdc01a98
9
01/08/98
,
,
,
I
l
1
1
~1S\!~".~!"t,:~\I,;h;',",: """';l' '..:.'
:;. .,:'\'~e>;{~i~.1f~F'.',~
,.",,',
. ! I. ~
'e'" ,r"