12/10/1998 (2)
, "
",
::.. I
, ~ .
...
,',
, ,
"'1'
> ,
i... \ . : c ~
, "
"
, "
,,'
"."1; t."",.: ,., ::""',,' ';", .;, >, '" :; ;,:.., .. . .:"
"
':. '
. ~')
,.j
, /:"'7\. '
" ,1
"-.,/,
, t'
I,;.
<J
DCAB
I'
....
',), Devel~pment Code Adjustment Board
. , Minutes
, ,
, '
c ~ ".
'J
, ;
"
Q
Date
:,~r
r'
;/',1:'..
":1. : I ~
;>~t.
rr"j.'"
.' ,.
~.4::l";;.
.~ " '
>'j',
:1.-
"
"
'~~ .:. ~.
~ ' ,
.:;" .'
'"
~~~'-
~~ : :~
'< (> ~.
(:":c"
.::',
.',
~;;, < .
,,'
, ~. c
, I
"v.I".l"
,/..., ,
i..", .
"
, I
"",c
"t":'
:.
'.'i
01//
""~._-~....,..-......... ..
,>
. ~: -.....~. ~"':~. ~.....".~ "-.I' '~~....J:. -F'")~ ". ~ ~. ", L ~:l~J".;r(;"" > '.~j..:y.:~~ I \ ~:'.~. ;'l, ~
>;,..'"
,'c L
.....'..Il~T.'..~ .~. ~:.til' .~.
, "
~
: .i
. '1'
0,1..
.", .
':\'
",1.
'...
:)
,',
" '
:j,:;
,,'
-'.'
I'
I, '
....\
'f<
, '
, ,
'>/',
..
" ,
"'.1
t;,
1)::.1
:',1,:.
" ',\
.... .
" '
"",
",
. ;'. .~
?
1,:',
......
o
.' '
"
,}
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD ~ ACTION AGENDA
CITY OF CLEARWATER
December 10, 1998
Call to Order at 1 :00 p.m., Pledge of Allegiance, and Invocation
ITEM #A - Time Extension Requests - None.
.
A 1) (approved 11/13/97) Breezewav Inc. (Breezeway Motel, Inc.) for second time extension
of six months for variance to parking requirement at 602 Poinsettia Avenue. Mandalay replat,
unit 5, block A. V97-66
ACTION: Granted as requested.
ITEM #8 - Continued Variance Reauests - None.
B1) ICont'd trom 11/12/98) Amaz D.. Bakiie F.. Neirn B. & Enveriie Abdullai (The
Renaissance on Sand Key) for variances to allow construction of residential condominium
building with zero setback and proposed height of 235 feet at 1370 Gulf Blvd., Sec 19-29-
15, M&Bs 14.04, 14.05 & 14.06, zoned CG (General Commercial) & aS/R (Open
, Space/Recreational). V 98-78
ACTION: Denied.
82) (Reconsideration from 09/24/98) Barbara l. Bennett for following variances (1 ) fence
height; (2) fence setback from right-at-way; and (3) required landscaping at 1784 Thames
St., Blackshire Estates, Lot 62, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98"64
ACTION: Granted as requested subject to conditions: 1) variances based on the
application, testimony, and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the
documents beyond the scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of these
variances, will result in these variances being null and of no effect and 2) requisite building
permit shall be obtained within 6 months.
ITEM he - New Variance Reauests
C 1 t Lois lear for variance to allow RV to be parked within right-ot-way setback at 2908
Edenwood St., Woodvalley Unit 5, Blk 4, Lot 61 zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential).
V 98~79 "
ACTION: Denied.
C2) Wilton & Jennifer D. lee. Jr. for variance to allow 15 foot structural setback to build
double car garage where 25 ft is required at 1506 Linwood Dr., Highland Estates, Blk B,
Lot 4, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-80
adc1298
12/10/98
1
"
"
~'.:~;~.~.~ I ',. ~ '." "~
~:t.~~~:~,l.:'(:'~~~"::':~~", ~ : ,~: '~l::
, '
\. . "\ T. ~
\'
:';
'" >, ~ " "', , ' , ,:' ; :":;': : ~,:, ':':; ,>: : ;,:,'; ':';,:: ",:",:",:,.",:::~,:.,'::,:{,~,',::.:,.':,'''';',',:',':",',':",.,.,:'::,:,,' ',::'",':",,;;,~,:,:,",~." ',:,:,'~,.',',:,':",',:',:,~""::>",:,::;,,,,:,,:,::':,'::~:"~:,,:,!:,:,,'~,',::.:~,:,,,,:,'::::,:,' ;,:,':':,;,'".:,',:"~,;,:,'""\,,,:,,,',:, :",:":,':,:",..,,:,,,:.,::i,:,:,',.:~,,::,:':',::',:,',:','":,:"",",;,~',:",'~.',',',,,',',,', ",< ',':,'.;'1.' :,',' ,;.':",':',,":','~~,"', :~'.:;' ", ::.: : ,':"', :,,', \ ' ": ," "::',', :,: ':" , ....,.' ", ' '. " :.'
\ .....'/ '';.':',;;;. :':'.,'!':;.. ': .' · ...,.;. '.';": '. .... :. .',,' ...... ;',: ....:;..\ "'...\,....... it.."... 'i ...;::2;:'::\,,';N1;),):J;~'2;:'":;, ,;'.,l:;;i:;~I:::?;':;"';~}:;r'~'
'.~,"< :' I,: ~ "::" 'i:: ,:': I t,' ,~ :"', "" ",;'" ,', ',' ': ': : ' " " ',t;, 1 '.' ,\':' ,', ~:',~t", I,: :,'." .:; ',':,:;:.~ f ".' {" '," ,l~' , ' , ,,' ") , : ' , ; " . '" , :' ::" <. : "
~
ACTION: Granted as requested subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the
application, testimony, and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the
documents beyond the scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance,
will result in this variance being null and of no effect 2) requisite building permit shall be
obtained within 1 year; and 3) applicant shall not be permitted to park a vehicle in the
driveway as the remaining length will be inadequate for a car without blocking the sidewalk.
C3) James W. Soboleski & Deborah L Groen for variance to allow a 10.5 foot structural
setback for covered passageway where 25 feet is required at 191 Devon Dr., Bayside Sub,
Lots 32-34, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-81
ACTION: Continued to January 14, 1999. ,
;\
C4) Community Service Foundation. Inc. (Foundation Village Neighborhood Family Center &
Clearwater Police Substation) for variance to allow 1 5 foot building setback where 25 feet
is required at 1498 S. Greenwood Ave., See 22-29-15, M&B 32.15, Fountain Oaks,' lots 1
& 2, zoned RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential). V 98-82
, ,rtfl;(.,
'f :a.
li:l:J
ACTION: Granted as requested subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the,
application, testimony, and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the
documents beyond the scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance,
will result in this variance being null and of no effect 21 requisite building permit shall be
obtained within 6 months; 3) applicant shall obtain the requisite conditional use approval for
this project; 4) applicant shall not locate a concrete walk area, or any other impervious
material, within the 15-foot setback along the south property line. This setback area may be
utilized only for landscape materials; and 5) applicant shall obtain requisite site plan
certification prior to obtaining a building permit.
"
" '
C5) Jerrv M. & Donna L. Kimball for variance to allow a 1 foot side setback where 5 feet is
required at 1564 Tascals Rd., Gates Knoll 151 Addition, lot 57, zoned RS 8 (Single Family
Residential). V 98-83
r,
ACTION: Granted as requested subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the
application, testimony, and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the
documents beyond the scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance,
will result in this variance being null and of no effect and 2) requisite building permit shall be
obtained within 1 year.
C6) L.O.M. Inc. (legends Steakhouse) for variance to construct balcony with front and side
setback of zero feet and variance to reduce parking to 29 spaces at 309 S. Gulfview Blvd.,
Lloyd-White Skinner Sub, Lots 60-62, 108-109, & part of Lot 107, zoned CR 28 (Resort
Commercial). V 98-84
.:)
adc1298
2
12/10/98
~
I
[
!,
r
1
ACTION: Continued to January 14, 1999.
< . T ,
i,::';~";,:\:~r ::,:,'
, ,<
'::::':"''''J~;::;':~'';':::,~;'"~",;;"-:",,,,:,,,\. ',' ":"..,
.' .'.) .c
,j' '< >' l."
. .'t
" ,
~.. .
~:. '.
I'
!,~
~' - [~,; '.
en Informatlon'Manaaement Resources for variance to allow 8 foot high wall/fence at
1180 Cleveland St., Gibsons Clea~water Heights" Lot 4.8, zoned UCIE) (Urban Center'
, Eastern). V 98-85
I '
~:~ '. "
ACTION: 'Granted as requested subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the
application, testimony, and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the
documents beyond the scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance,
will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) applicant must obtain an approved
landscape plan that meets or exceeds requirements set forth in Section 42.27 of current Land
Development Code prior to the issuance of any permits; and 3) requisite building permit shall
be obtained within 1 year.
I
r
I
.:~c ~ I .
'r'T':" ,
_:~'.:: c
~~:.:) " , ' ,
r.C: "
..}: ~, .
f::> , -' '
t.:,
c.;;./, ,
, "
. "
I~ :
.~{~... ::
'Proposed changes to draft discussed. Concerns expressed.
:t,.., .., c
y:(,', " ITEM #D - Land Develooment Code Amendments
Board recommended adoption of Chapters 40, 42,and 44 of the new Community
Development Code by a 4-1 vote.'
, ITEM #E .: Aooroval of Minutes - November 12, 1998 - Approved.
r. .
"ITEM #F - Board & Staff Comments
;,'.
~\~ .
, Happy, Holidays I
" ,
Adjournment - 5:25 p.m.
> ~ I
:~<
tC,.>
.I;" '
;:1
~~I~. . '<
~;l ~'
UF. .
':('IC'~' ,
~\~~('
:<;:?,<
~.;.~ I .
::r<::
.,"
,
:..,'
" '
" ,
L
(,
I,'
I" '
"
,
,
"
, '
, .',.om,)"
I ' "-'"
adc1298,
3
12/10/98
.~ ..
,,'
^ ,
d ..
" ,
~ld r.) M' I'. ."I~." ~ ' .,.rt':.'j.i"l~ "f\ 1;J.~.>"'''''.'
~~VJ"l, 'il, ')~~"I;;if,;' ~>; .;tj';\J;'\.lj','~.', '. "".'d" , ,
'6"~~n~~,~\l,-'.Jl: :. 'r:i~ ": \ ..: .. c' ~
, .~""
'""',, """,1",;,
, .
. .......: .'~'.. ,T "
" '.
, ;.i: '.. ,~ , ; ~ ~ .
. " ~,
.1.' n:,
'.,' '< .~.' ;:'>~;''j,'.~ r;~ :'
,:'. .,'"\j +'
.,. .
< ' \: ": " i
'tJ
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
December 10, 1998
Present:
William Schwob
William Johnson
Mark Jonnatti
Ron Stuart
Shirley Moran
Chair
Vice-Chair
Board Member
Board Member - arrived 1 :03 p.m.
Board Member
Also Present:
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Sandy Glatthorn
Ralph St.one
Patricia O. Sullivan
Assistant City Attorney
Planning & Development Services Manager
Planning Director
Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the
Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, review of meeting procedures, and explanation of appeal
process. ,
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in that order.
ITEM #A - Time Extension Requests
<'i~~
y;~~." A 1) (approved 11/13/97) Breezewav Inc. (Breezeway Motel, Inc.l for second time extension
'of six months for variance to parking requirement at 602 Poinsettia Avenue. Mandalay replat,
unit 5, block A. V97-66
Member Jonnatti moved to approve a 6 month extension for Item #A 1. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM #B - Continued Variance Reauests
B1) (Cont'd from 11/12/98) Amaz D.. BakUe F.. Neim B. & Enveriie Abdullaj (The
Renaissance on Sand Key) for variances to allow construction of residential condominium
building with zero setback and proposed height of 235 feet at 1370 Gulf Blvd.; See 19-29-
, 15, M&Bs 14.04, 14.05 & 14.06, zoned CG (General Commercial) & aSIR (Open
Space/Recreational). V 98-78
"
The subject property is developed with a restaurant which will be razed. Property to
the south is developed as a residential condominium while property to the north is vacant.
The subject property originally was part of the development to the south. Following
litigation, the subject property and property to the south were separated.
:~
The applicant proposes to construct a 235-foot, 27punit residential condominium
tower with integrated parking. The applicant has easements on the adjoining properties but
setbacks must be measured from the property line. Since the November 12. 1998,
mdc 1298
1
12/10/98
i
\
1
I
l
. ~
~.<.
J"
~.:'" . "/ .' (
~ . , .
'.. ,
'" ."r,
. , ~ ' .: '~., . . . '. I
, . . ......
'~' : ' ,: ,': ',:', "I ';
:~~";"C,f(~~:::~';;;)i::"';:,,;:if;/::;~(;:':i~,":~;":~'[i,0}!;:::}: \' ;\,,},);~
. '.' ~ I ',' .
, : ;"... ,.,;, < ...>':. .".,'.
'",:", <:,.\;!:':.;:>.". ...: .
.: .
, ,
I.',
" . /.",. ~~ .' '. i +, . 'I '!: . . I . '"
. ~ I. I . ' .. .', ',I,.',: ,'. :,,':.:, ' ,',',' "','".'
~ '. 0":' " I' ::,' ',' ,,'," ',:' ,~":,' . . ." .
. .~/. ':,' .... ; J '. '.'
"<" "... .,>".':" I. .. 4 .
.>.' L:' . I . .:~ ,
'. '. I
..' o.
.' '". I .' .' .;.,.
'1',
. '".
:"1
, 'Of' ~
" ,. ~:.: ~ '.' ~'.
"
, :..',tl"
, . '
, ,",
~. .', "I .:'
, ,
..... '
,..,
meeting, the applicant has revised the development plan to provide additional setbacks.
The applicant recognizes the request is for significant variances and has referenced higher
structures on Sand Key which do not meet height or setback requirements. Staff found, a
number of buildings between 150-feet and 220-feet high. Several properties which do not
meet height or side setback requirements were permitted due to court direction pursuant to
litigation.
I, ;~
. ~. .
':\.':
:,.'
The applicant contends the "urban context" of Sand Key development consists of
irregular tall building heights consistent with the proposed height for this project. The
applicant noted many buildings on Sand Key have separations consistent with the proposed
side setbacks. After reviewing scaled aerial maps and past files, staff has found several
circumstances supporting the applicant's contention. Projects such as the Grande, the
Meridian, the Crescent, and the approved site plan immediately to the north exhibit height
and setback dimensions that exceed current code requirements. Staff also has found many
structures that meet code requirements and are separated from other buildings by 1 50 to
300 feet.
: '~.
..!
'\',1
.,',',
"
"
~. .' .
""')
~~-'.
!'l....t, '1','
-t:j.loi
The proposed project is relatively small in terms of service impacts. The applicant
proposes to mitigate the large setback variances by "stepping back" the building sides as
the height increases. Proposed setbacks for the first 2 levels, second 3 levels, and first
half of the tower closely address setback requirements if measured at ground level. Staff
feels the requested height variance is not out of character with Sand Key buildings and the
structure's design meets all FEMA regulations. Other recent construction on Sand Key in
excess of 200 feet does not meet code. Staff recommends approval as the development
will be a high quality, small condominium project. Extensive landscaping off Gulf Boulevard
will enhance the area's beauty. The revised design opens view corridors, softens the project,
and harmonizes with the area.
. " ~
::.'
"
. "
, '
~, ::: .
c~.~'.,_'.
, ~. ..
,;
Planning & Development Services Manager Sandy Glatthorn stated the revised plan
steps back the building's sides on higher floors to improve the view corridor. In response
to a question, she reviewed code setback requirements. It was noted the code does not
provide for a stepped back design. Concern was expressed approval would establish a
precedent. Ms. Glatthorn said staff had evaluated the stepped back design as positive
even though the code does not provide specifically for a stepped back effect. In response
to a question, she said a swimming pool and outside amenities are not shown on the plan
as they have not been proposed yet. The plan meets requirements for the rear setback
based on the property line at mean high water. In response to a question, Ms. Glatthorn
was unaware of another stepped back design on the beach.
:t ,"
".t-:
....
:'; ~.'
..'
, "
,."
.;.;'
',\ :
:: ~ .
, "
',;
'.
I ;~.
:."
<.;.
Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall.Sides said this item is being heard under
quasi judicial hearing rules.
",
I,,;::;
i"
Brian Battaglia, representative for the applicant, presented an aerial photographic
display (Exhibit 1) of Sand Key and distributed pictorials representing the dimensions of the
, proposed setbacks IExhibit 21. He said the 27 condominiums will average $1. 6.million
each and increase City tax revenues. He said the proposed building separation and height
are consistent with Sand Key structures.
;.q
'I:.
'. "
,"
"
..
:...)
mdc 1 298
2
'2/10/98
I
I
I
I
t
',".J,
.;'
, ,
,~.,' .'
"
.~.:'5':' ...~ :~ (: /~.
',':/,',?'~~,;~;:, ;/,
:~:.:,:
" ",""" ',':'::.ri,...,:'",',::-';,f::::..."> ",,':' ',', ":":,,,:.:' ,',;"j,.'::""'"" i:<,',:','://i>,:::'(:\/,;:'::::",,<::/:<,f;',:,:';,;;:, ,"'!;..
"",,',',' ::;,,' ,: ",',,,;,~,:,~:,::,::,,;,,',~,,',,:;,;:::,,,,.:,'::,,,,',' ~:',:",~,',:,"";:"""',~,,~~',," :,i,:',"",:', ,:.';,:",'i,:,~,:,:,~/ <':';,.':,: , , , , .. .. ',' ':,',." "
, ,;\, ,,:.' '../,':',\',~'(';:,;>;:};\t;i2?:;:':':)~}:, " '.' ,:..:~;/' ":,::::;, 'U: ,; ":', ''-:!', '.',::;,' ", "';',, ,':' 'i:
.~
s1:(1:
(".I')
. p ~~,
~
I
He distributed Peter Gottschalk1s resume (Exhibit 3). Peter Gottschalk, architect,
said stepped setbacks are common place in nearby cities and will provide adequate
separation between the towers: He reviewed the development's plans and stated staff
photographs of Sand Key indicate 70-foot to 80-foot building separations are not unusual.
It was noted the structure's footprint is more compact than the Sand Key norm. In
response to a question, Mr. Gottschalk said two Ultimar towers are 252 feet high, and
taller than the subject project. He said the project will have fewer units per floor than most
buildings and is well set back from the CCCL (Coastal Construction Control Une). In
response to a question, he said most complaints about the project relate to view
obstruction. In response to a question, Anthony Battaglia said he hoped to be one of the
project's owners. He reviewed the property's history, noting the parcel had been acquired
from the Ed Wright estate trustee. In response to a question, Sam Codomo, consultant and
director of proposed purchasers, said project representatives had met several times with
the Sand Key Club board next door and had reviewed development plans.
In response to questions from Timothy Johnson, representative for the Sand Key
Club Condominium Association, Mr. Gottschalk said the proposed units will be between
3,500 and 10,000 square feet. No other documentation was presented in support of the
project. Mr. Johnson said the property owners of the Sand Key Club, directly south of the
proposed development, oppose the variances. After he called for a response from those
opposed to the requested variances, more than 100 audience members raised their hands.
He said the Sand I<ey Club will be most impacted by the project. He said the 133 foot
height variance request is 57% greater than code permits. He said Sand Key Club
residents know the lot will be developed but request the structure conform with code to
minimize impacts. He said the code does not authorize stair-stepping as a way to address
setback requirements. He said the front setback request is great and the side variance
requests are 448% greater than allowed by code. The code allows the building's height to
be 92 feet. He said neighborhood condominiums are between 150- and 220-feet. He said
the Ultimar towers are 231 feet high.
Mr. Johnson displayed a photograph of the neighborhood (Exhibit 41 and distributed
a table (Exhibit 5) of Sand Key buildings based on City records. He said all tall buildings are
located on the lsland1s north end. With the average height of nearby buildings at 135 feet,
he said the proposal is out of scale. He said the average separation between Sand Key
buildings is 174 feet. He said the separation from the Sand Key Club should he 106 feet,
the minimum necessary to maintain views from Sand Key Club units which face
north/south. Other developments with the same view pattern, such as those built by U.S.
Steel, have large separations.
Mr. Johnson distributed a sketch (Exhibit 6) demonstrating a building constructed on
the site without variances would have much less impact on Sand Key Club residents. He
said the request does not meet the standards of approval. He said the variances are
requested for economic gain. He said a search of County records indicate only 6 Sand Key
condominiums have sold for more than $600,000 during the past 6 years. He said the
proposed development is not in harmony with the neighborhood as variances would expand
'the footprint and impact additional Sand Key Club units.
1
i
J
[
!
!
!
mdc 1 298
3
1 2/10/98
~
Judy Simmons distributed a handout (Exhibit 7). She said approval of the variances
would be harmful to Sand Key Club residents as the proposed structure is too tall and too
close. She said a review of 4,000 Sand Key units sold since January 1995, indicate the
average Sand Key unit has less than 1,750 square feet, 8 foot ceilings, and sold for less
than $200,000. She said the proposed development will block most north units in the
Sand Key Club. Ms. Simmons submitted a petition (Exhibit 8) opposing the variances,
indicating it has 538 signatures.
Seven residents spoke against the variances stating the 0.96 acre lot is too small,
no amenities such as a swimming pool, tennis court, etc. have been proposed yet, Sand
Key Association representatives from 26 condominium projects oppose the development,
the City Manager supports tightening requirements, the structure would inflict Sand Key
Club residents with light deprivation, property values would be lowered, the narrow space
between buildings could result in a fire hazard, the proposal does not meet front setback
requirements, the development will undermine Sand Key's integrity, and the building's size
is inappropriate. A photograph (Exhibit 9) was submitted demonstrating how the proposed
development will impact the view from one Sand Key Club unit. Ten' letters in opposition
were submitted.
, "~Vl.')
";"'\1'
Brian Battaglia said Mr. Johnson had provided no evidence to support his claims. In
response to a question, Ms. Simmons said she had taken no measurements when she
photographed a panorama of the island from the mainland shoreline for Exhibit 4, but had
tried to remain equidistant from the Sand Key structures for each frame. Sonja Haught
said she had used available data to prepare to scale the mylar overlay used in Exhibit 4 to
demonstrate the impact of the proposed structure. Mr. Johnson said he had computed the
calculations and percentages listed in the Exhibit 5 tables. Ms. Simmons said she had
prepared the bUilding footprint contained in Exhibit 7. In response to a question from Mr.
Battaglia, Phyllis Lamphier said she was a real estate agent who believed the project would
have a negative impact on Sand Key Club property values although she had not performed
an appraisal.
Mr. Battaglia noted speakers who had addressed easements were not registered
surveyors. He said the panorama and mylar overlay do not depict the project accurately.
He said it is legitimate to consider the project in an urban context. He said the applicant
has worked hard with staff to address special circumstances and comply with the intent of
the law. He said the project represents a reasonable use of the property and is in harmony
with nearby developments. He said no evidence was presented indicating the project will
have an adverse effect on property values.
Mr. Gottschalk said although codes do not indicate setbacks can be connected to
the tier method, many cities routinely interpret them that way. He said concerns about the
size of the front setback are not relevant as the Sand Key Club exceeds that setback by
300%. He submitted a sketch (Exhibit 101 comparing the proposal with a structure built in
compliance with setback requirements, noting more Sand Key Club units would be blocked.
It was noted the building in the sketch is 145 feet high when only 92 feet is allowed. Mr.
Gottschalk indicated mechanical towers could be added to the top. Mr. Battaglia referred
)
'......
mdc 1298
4
12/10/98
'~ to staff's support'of the project. He said the board must weigh expert testimony. He said
< he had rebutted each issue addressed by the opposition. Mr. Johnson disagreed, stating
property owner views of property values are admissible.
It was noted while the building is attractive, the lot is too tiny. It was felt the
proposed structure is too massive. It was stated the Sand Key Club had not been designed
for construction of an abutting structure to the north although something will be built there
eventually. It was felt it is critical developers work with Sand Key Club residents for the
most desirable results. It was stated the proposal is out of scale with nearby development.
Concern was expressed the applicant had omitted important measurements from the site
plan. It was stated the standards for compliance had not been met as Exhibit 10 illustrates
a reasonable use of the property exists. It was felt the setback variances requested are too
great and height variance too drastic. It was stated the project is out of character with
Sand Key and meets none of the standards for approval. Concern was expressed the
applicant had not proven the development is in the best interest of Clearwater. It was felt
the best judges of a development's injurious impact are those who live nearby.
, '
Member Jonnatti moved to deny the variances requested in Item #B1 as the
applicant has not met the criteria contained in Code Section 45.24(1) and (2). The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The meeting recessed from 3:23 to 3:31 p.m.
(,
,,:,:/1,
B2) (Reconsideration from 09/24/98) Barbara L. Bennett for following variances (1) fence
height; (2) fence setback from right-of-way; and (3) required landscaping at 1784 Thames
St./ Blackshire Estates, Lot 62, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-64
This property is developed with a single family residence and swimming pool on
Thames Street. The County plans to widen Keene Road, the non-addressed street. The
applicant had applied for variances to erect a 6-foot privacy fence in the street setback area
from Keene Road. ' On September 24/ 1998, DCAB (Development Code Adjustment Board)
had approved the height variance but denied the requested setback and landscaping
variances.
Subsequently, City landscaping and forestry staff has visited the site and reported
that existing trees and root systems would conflict with a fence installed 3 feet from the
property line and that the trees provide adequate buffer. Staff recommends that DCAB
reconsider the setback and landscaping variances and approve them as requested.
Landscape Forestry Specialist Scott Kurleman had visited the site on October 8,
199B. He'said the property/s live oak and Australian pine trees will be removed when
Keene Road is extended. The fence cannot be installed in its proper location without
harming the long leaf pine tree. It was noted the board had wanted to avoid an alley look
along Keene Road.
Don McFarland, representative, displayed an aerial photograph of the site, noting the
fence line intersects with the pine tree. He said the applicant is Willing to beautify the
,:)
mdc129B
5
12/10/98
.~
outside of the fence once road construction is complete. The applicant wants a buffer
from the project. No documentation in support or opposition was presented. It was noted
the applicant had provided proof of special circumstances. Concern was expressed a
precedent not be established as the board had ordered another homeowner to jog a fence
around an obstruction. Ms. Glatthorn reported pine trees have sensitive root systems.
Member Moran moved to grant the variances 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 conditions: 1) variances based on the application, testimony,
and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other
documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the documents beyond the
scope expressly authorized by,the Board in approval of these variances, will result in these
variances being null and of no effect and 2) requisite building permit shall be obtained within
6 months. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM He - New Variance Reauests
1
!
I
, I
f
I
(
I
,
j
i
\
j
I
!
i
C 1 J Lois Lear for variance to allow RV to be parked within right-of-way setback at 2908
Edenwood St., Woodvalley Unit 5, Blk 4, lot 6, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential).
V 98-79
:.
il'l}~!l
('~'11
'h..:-
The applicant is requesting a variance to park a recreational vehicle in her driveway
within the 25-foot front yard setback. The lot's side yards are narrower than the 8.5-foot
wide RV. Other Wood Valley subdivision lots are similarly sized. Staff feels the lack of
parking area outside the setback is a self-imposed condition. The lot already contains a
permitted use. The request does not reflect the Code's purposes and intent to protect the
City's visual character and minimize adverse impacts by development on nearby property.
Staff recommends the request be denied.
Lois Lear, applicant, submitted photographs of her property. She said other
neighborhood residents park RVs and boats in their front yards but claimed City inspectors
do not enforce the law equally. She said only one neighbor has complained about her RV.
,In response to a question, Ms. lear said she has owned her home for 2 Yz years and the
RV for % year. It was stated residents are obligated to check with code restrictions before
purchasing RVs or boats and parking them on their property. No documentation in support
was presented.
Monica Moir submitted photographs of the subject property, noting the RV is visible
from her bedroom window. She said she has lived in her house for 26 years. She
submitted a letter in opposition signed by 5 neighbors.
Ms. Lear said the RV does not block the sidewalk. It was recommended the CRT
(Community Response Teaml make a thorough inspection of the whole neighborhood. It
was requested staff follow-up onthe house reported by Ms. lear, that remains out of
compliance. The code requirement for RVs was reviewed.
"~
mdc 1 298
6
12/10/98
, '
~.~.
........
':,~.f: ~ . 'i' " \ . '
, '
. . ..'
... "':'~ ....:.\..........><.,:.t.~.:~...+...;..,' ,', . I'
: , '/- ':,<'" <.. ",' : ,:,,' , " , ", :~:,:" ,'~'<,,<':""",.' :,:r:;':;': ..'
,I.. . I" . ' j. , . . ~ . ", .' : .' .'. . . ", '. ..
.:~: ~.' .'.. "'.' :\:' j"" ',I ..:.....:;.:. ""~"',:'.' 1./ ':\''.::1'"''
'. " ; . ~ . . . : " . . I 1 : : .':',',: j .....::., I., > I ~'" ' ',' \ .
I 1- {. ~ . ..':.:. /:;.", .,;; .
>"'~"/"', ' :":"~":"" '>':,::,'::,i:',:;:,'=,:.":",,:'(:,/"::"'::<':'" , '~ ,':"::' "'~':"'"
,I ' r "J I""
..I.c'
. c .~ :.' . .
<. .. .' , ~,'!~''''',' ~ :, ' , . , .. ". ,
'. I" ..'.", .:. ~'; .' , ; : ,~.:.. ':', ' ; '.. '. ~" :,::':: :. '. I ;10
i . ; I,"..,,' " . .' '. ~...' ,~ . . " I"
. '. ", ". ,. ",..: ,~.. .' '. I " '. ' , , . .' . "'~", .: ' : . .. . ~ .. . ': ~ I'
i::4,', ,'; ,',,'..<~.:!;;:{,M}<:;p':.:' 'I"" ,,'
'.'
c," '", I"
. ,.' J. .c' . <" ".'
, ,." .' ~ , .
" '., I \ :> ," , ,e' .':" " .
" !
:..!:: I
',:;. \..
,',
.,'.'
. "!'-~
"
~
Member Johnson moved to deny the variance requested in Item #C1 as the
applicant has not met the criteria contained in Code Section 45.24. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
C2) Wilton & Jennifer D. Lee. Jr. for variance to allow 15 foot structural setback to build
double car garage where 25 ft is required at 1506 Linwood Dr., Highland Estates, Blk B,
Lot 4, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-80
,',
The applicant plans to add a double car garage and remodel the single car garage
into a safe room for his handicapped son. The property is developed with a single family
residence and additions that meet the needs of the applicant's family. Staff feels the
variance is a reasonable accommodation. Neighbors have signed a letter in support of the
project. As part of this approval, the applicant cannot park any vehicle in the remaining
length of the driveway and inhibit the sidewalk.
~~~~t
t.,."
~~
Wilton Lee, applicant, submitted a petition, dated October 28, 1998, signed by 8
neighbors in support of the request. In response to a question, Ms. Glatthorn said the CRT
would enforce the conditions. In response to a question, she said traffic engineering had
opposed the request if the sidewalk is blocked. While 15 feet will remain between the
addition and sidewalk, the average parking space is 19 feet long. Mr. Lee indicated he will
park 2 vehicles in the garage and the other vehicle in the easement on the west side of ,the
garage. In response to a question, Ms. Glatthorn indicated a variance to lay concrete for
the parking space will not be necessary if the property's minimum green space remains in
ratio with code requirements.
Member Johnson moved to grant the variances as requested because the applicant
substantially has met all standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the application, testimony,
and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other
documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the documents beyond the
scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this '/ariance, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect 21 requisite bUilding permit shall be obtained within 1
year; and 3) applicant shall not be permitted to park a vehicle in the driveway as the
remaining length will be inadequate for a car without blocking the sidewalk. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C3) James W. Soboleski & Deborah L. Groen for variance to allow a 10.5 foot structural
setback for covered passageway where 25 feet is required at ,391 Devon Or., Bayside Sub,
Lots 32-34, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 98-81
The applicant seeks a variance to add a porte cochere to a single family residence in
the front yard setback. Staff recommends denial.
Robert Heberich, representative, said he had not received a copy of the staff report,
and incorrectly had thought staff supported the request. He requested the item be
continued.
"~)
mdc1298
7
12/10/98
'.;'.:'.~'~~.:,.I .:. ': " ~:'...I:.::t'.'''':~: I..... .~ I....'~' I'"
'. .' f,: ~': ";'.' '..:'. >h.: I .1. ~' , 1 . . I
'.",:':," !," .. ,;,',::;' ",' ,,':, :/,: ,:':;;::~ :'::, ,::, '::,:', ,', ':,,/,.....: ,,:.'.,>,:,":
: I ". ~ . " .. ... .;: 1: :~ .: ',' " < \' I, .: ... . '. ..,
t ... ~ .' '11 ", \ . I. .,:
"':~'i I .. . " I
, '
It . ~ ~. . / . ~
'",", '. ,;",:.: <,. ,', ".. .' . < l .:' ~'I'. " , ' ",.,. .'.:....< ~..\..'''.~':.. ~:".'<. " ".
.,:: _ . ,,~,",.,: ,,',::~:, U.,"~,:;",";:,'.i!,':':,;::,',:,:,~:(/\,i y, """,,".' :,,:':i, · .>,;. ....~..... .;,". ...-:....,:',::',:: :,:; ."~:":',,'::~;,.,~:::,:;:,:~,.':',:::: ';, ; ';:":';
""","<:':""</:"~:,,:',>.',';',,;:_':",,~,,,,'"':".',,"",'.~' ',"',','"",','",.,.'~:,',',"',':,' J .,. .. .> , . ~ .
- " . ",:':;':,,>,':"":":"::::,':,',',':,:'i;::,,'.:,,",',
." ',:':',':":':,',.,':"!',>,:.:~,,r""::,,.,.,' J I (,. I' ,,:-":. ,,' ,,'
....~.,. '1 . . .::. "! ,: "'1"<1:" ..' .~, :....~.i ::: '." .,~f
". " ,~L
I~.,:...
I ':~:' '. I
~
'. .'.
.~', :": ~
..\r
i,
: '/'
~~ ': .
,IJ.i{'
, (.~,
~ ':. !.
....
"
-: ~ . .'
'. . ~
;'t,
._,'1'
I I . i ~
. I'.
,1-,:
: "
... ~
!,:'j'
, "
,
.1,."
,..
.. ;:)
i,'
':',",'
"':.1;
,'I:,:
.~
:" \
'"
" ,.
~} , ,..
;',
:!'.
\'.';:,;,<:':",
::;*:":,::
Member Johnson moved to continue Item #C3 to January 14, 1999. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C4) Communltv Service Foundation, Inc. (Foundation VlIlage Neighborhood Family Center &
Clearwater Police Substation) for variance to allow 1 5 foot building setback where 25 feet
is required at 1498 S. Greenwood Ave., See 22-29-15, M&B 32.15, Fountain Oaks, Lots 1
& 2, zoned RM 8 IMultiple Family Residential). V 98-82
The applicant, CSF (Community Service Foundation, Inc.), is proposing to develop
this site with 5,OOO-square foot building housing a Police substation and neighborhood
family center. On August 11, 1998, the Future Land Use Designation was changed to
Residential Medium. This lot is difficult to develop in accordance with setback
requirements. Constructing the building in the setback will save 3 large oak trees in the
center of the site. Staff has determined that proposed construction, as indicated on the
site plan, will not impact the health of these trees.
The police substation will face South Greenwood Avenue and provide the Police
Department with optimum visibility of the street. The building's west half, where most
parking spaces are needed, will serve as a community neighborhood family center. The
trees will shelter an outdoor play area for children in association with the family center.
Staff feels the proposed setback will not impact negatively on surrounding properties nor
be detrimental to the public welfare. The reduction will benefit the natural environment by
allowing the trees to remain and provide the Police Department with a site to monitor
neighborhood safety.
The applicant has indicated a willingness to remove the concrete walkway within
the 15-foot setback of the south property line and instead install landscaping to improve
the building's appearance. Woodlawn Street also will buffer the proposed development
from area residential uses. The development will require a certified site plan. The proposed
use requires conditional use approval by the Planning & Zoning Board.
Gerry Spilatro, CSF Executive Director, reviewed the background of the project and
CSF's mission. He said CSF, working in partnership with 10 organizations, had applied for
a safe neighborhood grant to reduce drug related crime. The approved grant will help build
the police substation and cover police overtime pay. A CDBG (Community Development
Block Grant) will be used to help build the family center.
Lee Regulski, CSF Trustee and project planner, indicated the variances will save the
trees and subsequently provide enjoyment for program participants. He said the setback on
Woodlawn will not affect area aesthetics. The organization worked with staff to remove
the proposed sidewalk. In response to a question, he reviewed the property's history. CSF
is donating the property to the City which will use Brownfields money to clean up
contaminants. Duke Teiman said the neighborhood had organized a group patrol to fight
drugs and prostitution. He said the Police Department needs visibility. He reviewed CSF
efforts to upgrade the neighborhood. No documents were presented in support or
opposition to the project. It was noted the project has been a great success story and all
participants were congratulated.
!
\
;
r
1
I,
t
!
f
(
mdc1298
8
1 2/10/98
, l <" ',. L
'....:.:...';1
:';~"!".:;:':'... 'r~:'.>:~\I"'I,:,':>j'""",,":'\ ,:,,:, '. """,, ' ", :>...:" "Y',::,~:.,'::, ," i' " ,
':.:,':::/ :":'~" ,,':; ,,',;,,','i,;'. ,'",<<':,i',.>.'.';.;::,'::,',,:>,!,',..,,:' "';', " " ,'."
" :'.. :,';." ,,: :: ':.:'!..:.',:,,;), ':', ,.",':,:>, /,,;, .::~:, ", ,,", " ,\-:.. ':.':',:':: ':, ;:.... ',~ :'. . :,'.. ;::', : ..,...., ':" :',..,';: ,~>,L,:".,:,~,.;,:.~,:,',',',,:,':.::':',:'::',;,:.",;~".~,:,',:,;':,..;:,,','~,:,:,'.:.',',',',,';:,,:'.':~::','I(,':
. . "..;, ..':' \ ~ .: ,.,':;',.: I """~": ',i,. :. ;.': " " ,""",",',', .' . ..,' ., . . '. " . .
, ',' " ,,' ,,'" ," /.:' :'::::,:::"":,',:,,:,1':,:,'<,,,', ,. I .. \ ' . . '
"",', , .,' '::',;' _', ',:' ",,' ' : '",:,:i:' <".'>:,;".,.:,:....." ',' .;';.... ,,":. .':.~:'
,,',' ,..::';, :,:,,\ ,.',' - ,no'; ',..::".:',:~;, <,,;'. "".. " ",,',"',:. ....:' '"
. I :: ~ I '. ;.' l " ~. 1.1: .. \~. ;. , . I .:~: '.'
.::':......
. I ~ '.
":. '
: _.e,.
," <, ."
I '~";'" . ....::....:.. \: .:/.., ,: I'
I '. .
",'; " .
<: '. .~ ~':..: " : :. 'f I': :..:, .
.,. ~.,...'~:: L~.'!J..
,i',
. ,',
.: .,' '", :; ':,':
':. .:..~..;\~~.I ;<~....:.::, .
~ ".
" :.
,
" '....
,': h',"
"
"~., : .
'< . ~ i
~
Member Jonnattl moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant
substantially has met all standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land
Development Code, subject to conditions: 1} variance based on the application, testimony,
and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other
documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the documents beyond the
scops expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect 2) requisite building permit shall be obtained within 6
months; 3) applicant shall obtain the requisite conditional use approval for this project; 4)
applicant shall not locate a concrete walk area, or any other Impervious material, within the
15.foot setback along the south property line. This setback area may be utilized only for
landscape materials; and 5) applicant shall obtain requisite site plan certification prior to
obtaining a building permit. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ms. Glatthorn reported the item had been advertised correctly.
C5) Jerrv M. & Donna t. Kimball for variance to allow a 1 foot side setback where 5 feet is
required at 1564 Tascala Rd., Gates Knoll 1 sl Addition, lot 57, zoned RS 8 (Single Family
Residential). V 98-83
(;r~'
,::;)
The applicant has requested a setback variance to build a carport for a covered
parking space for his boat. While most surrounding residences have double car garages,
this property has a single car garage. The house is in the lot's center and extends to the
front setback line. A side setback variance will be necessary to construct the carport. For
many years, the boat has been parked on the side of the house with no objection; owners'
of abutting properties have signed a letter in support. Staff recommends approval. letters
of support from surrounding neighbors were submitted. Jerry Kimball, applicant, submitted
a letter of support'signed by 4 individuals.
Member Johnson moved to grant the variance as requested because the applic'ant
substantially has met all standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the application, testimony,
and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other
documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the documents beyond the
scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect and 2) requisite building permit shall be obtained within 1
year. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
C6) L.O.M. Inc. (Legends Steakhouse) for variance to construct balcony with front and side
setback of zero feet and variance to reduce parking to 29 spaces at 309 S. Gulfview Blvd.,
Lloyd-White Skinner Sub, Lots 60-62, 108-109, & part of lot 107, zoned CR 28 (Resort
Commercial). V 98-84
The applicant, Legend Steakhouse, has applied for variances to parking and setback
requirements to build a new deck which will increase the business' parking requirement.
,~
mdc1298
9
1 2/10/98
. " ; I ,. . " .' '. . _' I '~ ..,' . . .' {. ~' +. '.,' . ., 'I :. . .: . ...l. . .".' . L', : I '.' .
"}
, Concern was expressed the board had not received copies of minutes from previous
meetings covering actions related to this property nor the complete application. In
response to a question, Ms. Dougall.Sides said the board must base decisions on current
code. Reluctance to discuss this issue without reviewing the relevant minutes or
, application was expressed. A letter of support was received.
Member Johnson moved to continue Item #e6 to January 14, 1999, and requested
staff provide board members with copies of minutes covering previous actions related to
this property and a complete application. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
It was requested staff provide the board with copies of the section in the draft code
relative to this issue.,
C7) Information ManaQement Resources for variance to allow 8 foot high wall/fence at
1180 Cleveland St., Gibsons Clearwater Heights, Lot 4-8, zoned UC(E) (Urban Center
Easternl. V 98-85
{)
The applicant plans to build a 8-foot high wall at the boundary between a residential
and commercial district where the height will provide a more effective buffer to benefit the
welfare of the owner, employees, and residents. The building's location and existing parking
make a 6-foot wall less effective for security reasons. Staff feels the project promotes
downtown redevelopment and revitalization and addresses concerns for the welfare and
safety of employees and neighbors. The planned improvements reflect the spirit and intent
of revitalization. Ms. Glatthorn said the landscape plan staff had recommended is not
appropriate for a wall in this location.
AI Justice, representative, said IMR (Information Management Resources) had
planned to raze the structure but now will move 40 computer programmers into the
building in January 1999. IMR wants to build in wall out of concern for the safety of
employees of the 24 hour a day operation. ' Dead trees have been removed. IMR has
agreed to plant trees by neighboring houses to improve the buffer. The precast wall will
feature attractive architectural characteristics on both sides. A wood fence will not be
installed. tMR plans to raze the building next year. No documentation in support or
opposition was presented.
Member Johnson moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant
substantially has met all standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land
Development Code, subject to conditions: 1) variance based on the application, testimony,
and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other
documents in support of the request. Deviation from any of the documents beyond the
scope expressly authorized by the Board in approval of this variance, will result in this
'variance being null and of no effect; 2) applicant must obtain an approved landscape plan that
meets or exceeds requirements set forth in Section 42.27'of current Land Development Code
prior to the issuance of any permits; and 3) requisite building permit shall be obtained within
1 year. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
~~
mdc1298
10
12/10/98
'J
ITEM #D . land Develooment Code Amendments
Planning Director Ralph Stone briefly reviewed land Development Code
amendments. City representatives have continued meeting with neighborhoods,
community organizations, and the City Commission. Significant modifications have
occurred. The granny flat and 6 foot walls in front yards have been eliminated. Single
family residence neighbors now can appeal decisions related to abutting properties.
Required setbacks for water front property may be modified. Lighting modifications have
been added to protect sea turtle nesting. Sidewalk vendors will be permitted on the beach
under the same guidelines as downtown. Duplexes can be built on corner lots in single
family residential areas only if the lot is vacant when the new land Development Code is
adopted. Neon outlining windows and a building's perimeter will count against the signage
allowance.
It was felt rearranging the code makes referencing easier. Approval of flexibility in
commercial areas was noted. In response to questions related to resident concerns, Mr.
Stone said adult theaters must be at least 450 feet from residential property and building
heights on the beach will be flexible. Rules are tightened related to transferring densities.
..;;I':~
+....,~;.l~J
It was 1elt rules related to in-fill projects in commercial areas are too flexible as the
7 performance standards are subject to jUdgment calls. Concern was expressed that
combining the boards will reduce citizen protections as only 4 votes will be necessary to
approve a controversial project. It was felt the Planning & Zoning and Development Code
Adjustment boards represent different points of view and philosophies. It was stated
combining the boards will limit citizen input. It was said this issue could be amended later.
Mr. Stone said if meetings become lengthy, changes can be made. He said staff
decisions will limit board business. Concern was expressed staff will have the power to
make substantive decisions. It was felt staff may relax requirements significantly, noting
the board had denied una'nimously a variance request supported by staff in Item #81.
Concern was expressed the code no longer regulates the sale of alcoholic beverages
as conditional uses. It was felt it is essential the City can correct out of control situations.
Mr. Stone said separations from schools and churches remain. The City will rely on
licensing criteria for control. It was felt the code revisions give away the protection of
citizen boards that have helped make Clearwater great. It was suggested amendments can
be made once it is clear certain provisions do not work out.
Member Jonnatti moved to recommend the City Commission adopt Chapters 40,
42, and 44 for the new Community Development Code. The motion was duly seconded.
Members Johnson, Jonnatti, Stuart, and Moran voted "Aye"; Chair Schwab voted "Nay."
Motion carried.
ITEM HE - Approval of Minutes
........J
mdc1298
1 1
12/10/98
.f.,'
jyt:;'I'(~':f'::':",,',:l~ ':;;'
~,;,,:~':,: ",:i;'!: >\'< '< ',' :;. ,I"
,
'I'
"~\ T
..
~),'c
~~ .-
:~;'" ~ '
,I':/~
.I~, '., ,}
. ..-......:.,
.',.'
i/::O"
." .
,'. '
" '
';,
.... :1
"
Member Moran moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November
, 12, 199B, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. .
ITEM #F - Board & Staff Comments
',/
Happy Holidaysl '
Adiournment
Ttw meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. .
.~ · ..... .L~
Chair~~'" , ,
Development Code Adjust.ment Board
B
'1
, ,
, "
, "
'.
l'
1
I
I
I
,l I
I
1
1
;
'!
',I
"
, "
'I ',',
"
,',:
" /
'/
, "
. ;'r. '
':c'
.., ' "..""):
'. " '
;, ' < I . " "
II ' ",,~""', d 1298
;\. ',m c '"
, .', ~ .
12
12/10/98
'"L ~., ,
"if' -' ~ ~," .'1 "". ~.... I u",' u, .... '~~;... .','. .~ .. i ".,~: . ,. ,"~ ,'. ~.~ . ' " " ',- :/'" '........,
~~~t~i!.1J!.l.\M~"J:.rl;l:.~~'.."'lJ.~..b~ "',"tH"~.":"f- ',~4"~'i~,J;,.JP~'" ~I" ~>~. '*.'t'~: :, ji;, .....;;.:., "'..~l~(j" '~::" !tl ,. l'tJ.'f~l''''~. ':; ;: rr(.':" <.;,+;' , "f',,. . :'," . ..t. .~ t' \,~ ~ \ '. < '. ~ '.' I. ~ \, , ,', \: . ..:' 'J~r" ~ ~< .r I, ~I I,
)11,~,.;c,... " '<;', . ",', ~ ,'" :.~1:t''''''Ht1,...t..'''J-'.''''''f.tl~\}t...;j....;<lf~L~t\:l,.l~~-IJtf,.:.!l{Y.l.~~hJ:\~'<'.ff"':1~'-,,~~':'\'(~""~;~"~'\'_~ ~"." ~':'I.....,;t~~",'''),,"'{'h'