4896-89..K•. [.d'.?`r '. ?.`!,_ ?'> ?!. - ? ,F:. ????rq';e .?r"gofer, },. St :.?w.
;RAF
r„ T•
?,? `J i ? -;e ``fi tee' ? •t iA7a 'a
kv-T
,E L'• t.. .`.r: .`r' ?:si _ + "tire
'is? . s°_?'r"......ti.r....a_.,.:'.?.?.. Y::t:i.v!a:. :24`..'>F:hx'?i?i, l11Y,2.?i .JF1u.!?::`. a.3?i%. nre;tiij?=r°:o ;mss+'.-.?ri .? ......... ....:.a.;. •:... uo__. a.. _ . __. _ _ _ .. _ ._.. - ... _ .-?-. 'S'." -".?''_?. ie.? .a
.».......,-. ..... ?.?..-....._. .-.. ..--.-...... ...,, .. . .. . ....... .. .... ... .........p.,._....Q.rn?..?.c,...a... ,r..... n.a. araurw.r.l,?.• ..... r.a•.urne5 `?v,.. :;+rx
t
S
ORDIMAHCE NO. 48%-89
t
r°.
r..
?I
i'• Jz?
?.3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAND WITHIN THE
CITY OF CLEARWATER; PROVIDING THAT THE ORDINANCE OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PINELLAS COUNTY WHICH
ESTABLISHES A MORATORIUM ON LAND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN
PINELLAS COUNTY SHALL NOT BE ENFORCED BY THE CITY WITHIN
THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY; DECLARING SUCH COUNTY
ORDINANCE TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted Ordinance No. 89-
49 (herein, the "County Ordinance"), which establishes a moratorium on land
development within certain defined corridors centered on certain "backlogged"
state roadways in Pinellas County, including land located within the corporate
limits of the City of Clearwater; and
WHEREAS, Section 13 of the County Ordinance provides that, to the extent
that the ordinance conflicts with a municipal ordinance, the municipal ordinance
shall prevail; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Clearwater finds and declares
that, for the reasons set forth herein, the County Ordinance should not be
enforced by the City within the corporate limits of the City; now, therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 89-49 of the Board of County Commissioners of
Pinellas County shall not be enforced by the City within the corporate limits
of the City for the following reasons:
(1) Although the City Commission recognizes the requirements of the Local
Governmental Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, as set
forth in Section 163.3161, et seq., Florida Statutes, it has not been shown that
a moratorium is necessary or preferable to a case-by-case determination with .
respect to properties for which a development order or permit may be requested;
(2) Each municipality which does not elect to exempt itself from the
County Ordinance will be required to consider applications for exemptions and
variances from the moratorium, and the time required by the City to consider
and decide upon such applications will detract from the ability of the City to
complete its work upon the new comprehensive plan for the City and the enabling
ordinances required thereby;
(3) The decentralization of the authority to grant exemptions and
variances from the County moratorium will tend to result in an unequal
application of the ordinance countywide, because properties similarly situated
1
1-/rfel - f j
.?t :I-. ?• s,'t? ?. 14t f:'i ?S N??:7 s.55' ti;
?x e]'
Fi
.?Id I ti S 't'r'.:
•,ts.'? rt
''?;??< ?Nf •J ?I. a ..?,'? ],
'L. Y h
•iA ? ? v :t -Y
1 is €
? 1'.. ?: «.r.. :3• .?{? ,,,,???'? ?.y' '1'vn.c.? a .{.S, .'?,,v' k ' Y. • i'1= _# .y+ f .1 3s
}.: ".?1' ,??x,,' - ?tta<r ??,? ..?;?"a ?¢?'a q? .?.i?•'e '''3..?.i`- ? Sa??:Sy r13'?:?ia6+3S?',f .} ?*?.
??"? ?•??"?`??r?`?.. '?{; ?.;i!!4::^5$°/v ?»;"?.?`.?'l???FSk•f•?:•'??StL`R'ti ,??a„?• ?Yp-?.c r'?• e'.l-s+,?•?,Sq? r
?r:+.`?' ?:•«:43;x•.::.1`,..? :•;.:.ti 'i:t'ilricrr'?'?.::1::?S'? .?:e.t-::;: rrw.n _ r.f'?.3??«.r, r.s??,?!:,v?i.ar+??Flmt?!1.?4;wtY ,.e
•s
may be treated differently depending upon decisions to be made by different
officials in the Jurisdictions in which the properties are located;
(4) The terms, "site plan applications or their municipal equivalent"
and "final local development order . or its municipal equivalent," are vague
and uncertain, and will require an interpretation of the City's Land Development
Code which may contribute to the unequal application of the ordinance countywide;
(5) The need for Pinellas County to enact a concurrency management system
by January 1, 1990, is inapplicable to the City because the City is not required
to adopt a concurrency management system until June 1, 1990;
(6) The ultimate decision to be made by the County or by the City with
respect to each application for a development order or permit requires the
consideration of a complex and sometimes competing set of factors, including but
not limited to the "concurrency" requirement, the discouragement of urban sprawl,
and the provision of affordable housing, and each local government agency must
consider whether its decision with respect to a specific parcel of property may
be deemed a "taking" of the property in violation of the Constitution and Section
163.3194(4)(x), Florida Statutes, and such decisions ought not to be made in the
form of,a moratorium; and
(7) The County Ordinance may be found unconstitutional on its face or
as applied, and the City should not be required to defend against such claims
and risk potentially costly judgments against the City without good reason.
Section 2. For the reasons set forth in Section 1, the County Ordinance
is hereby declared to be in conflict with this ordinance.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED ON FIRST READING _ September 21, 1989
PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL
READING AND ADOPTED AS AMENDED
Attest:
Cyn is E. a eau
Cit Clerk ` -
Approved as to form and correctness:
M. A. GaTbr; Jr.
City Attorney
Mayor-Commissioner
2
5, 1989
W V6- fl?
A
?t .. ;•s.,, ..y. ? .. ,. .t. • i ..i e ^ r? ,r.w ?... ?, n;> .-.+,. +r: n ?- '+,•.r;i°? .;gas q.+?#',?:.? ;..s,?.y?7r'
fem.
?i> .t '?.,?.. ;1???5 ??' .s Y' ..s ?i?v}`/? ti,,;tr..,.,.}E?';,.y?`d•,;,.. .,f '.1 ?; _y? ?'S ?5. 'm?::, ,?' ov.
?,,r?. ta.z:".2.' :?, `?•`,4 s?.°k?'4aS'`?'=:v: ?at`'.a? ??? '?i.???;?s'4,..x .;, :?='r}£=;t"y, `4?n.°-?;,r';..,..,+.,;f t' .??
:: ;rrs ltd;. t ??
;; rN. ti''•,?''r ?,?">{s ;ti:'???.','.3':t'e?:v.:;?•Fy'??.:i'i"J??:acm.,.,.:..,?-''i;`.'.'...?.r.?aty ff..:-&r`;??:6''F..; fi. ,: ?'1:.i7. ?'.,''d'1•k'SL' l`aW`'Y,:a°l.•?„.d,:{•,:?i'?.t•??:Y4r?i? i
bc?F
h III 'S=
w'
- Section-3, Paragraph f of Subsection (1) and Subsection (6) of Section
<.; 134.012, Code of Ordinances, are amended to read:
Sec. 134.012. Sign types.
The following requirements shall apply to the individual types of signs
° permitted under this chapter:
(1) Pole signs:
f. As an alternative to olacina a sinale sion on a Dole, the
total allowable sign surface area may bedivided and utilized to place not more
than two (2) signs on the same pole. Multiple dataehedsigns shall be allowed
However, no sign or signs shall
be placed on any sign structure which requires the combination or utilization
in any manner whatsoever of two (2) or more surface areas identified in these
sign regulations.
(6) Window signs:
a. Temporary window signs mM shall not exceed thirty (30) 444-
44%4 per cent of the area of the window in which they are displayed- if the
ry
cumulative area of all-permanent „and„temporary, window signs is equal to or less
than fifty-(-50)-percent of the area of the window in which they are displayed.
b. Permanent window signs shall not exceed twice the maximum area
of the business identification sign„ allowed or twenty---(20) of the area
of the window, whichever is less 44fteen (16-) pe;- eent of .tie- area ofthe , ~ ,,e
in whieh V ?i
C. All window signs shall be placed only in the windows of
nonresidential uses.
Section 4, Paragraph (4) of Subsection (c) of Section 134.013, Code of
Ordinances, is amended to read:
Sec. 134.013. Permits,
(c) Submission requirements. No request for a sign permit shall be
considered complete until all of the following has been submitted to the
development code administrator:
(4) Application fee. The applicant shall be required to pay an
application fee according to the current schedule of fees established by the
city commission for the particular category of application. This fee shall be
3
,'?.
nonrefundable irrespective of the final disposition of the application.
Multiple signs in the window or windo s o a single occu a c submitted-as a
single application-shall be emitted under one application fee.
Section . This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED ON FIRST READING September 21, 1989
PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL
READING AND ADOPTED _ October.5, 198
Rita Garvey
Mayor-Commissioner
7
Y
tl
7
Y
Y
F
M.' A. Galbraith, rait , Jr.
City Attorney
I
'
t
4
•?? I .?Y.h..-.•...WLes 4l ti:
aTSh7 r"u wt+,a?l:??YI'w?7..vow=F+.i,?41?wx•?:?Z-:'?1F+'•.1W.? «.
r
...,.., M. •.N., s, .J.r.• •F'.': i'1.F'I .M„'d'
.. .-..r-?1`/.[j.Zyw?'?•??. ..w f p??? t31L.YSYi4i"lttY'^
.
. ,.
Attest:
yn Ia E. Gou eau
Cj0t Clerk'
Approved as to f m and correctness: