04/25/1991 DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
April 25, 1991
Members present:
Thomas J. Graham, Chairman
Otto Gans, Vice-Chairman
John W. Homer
Alex Plisko
Emma C. Whitney
Also present:
Lou Hilton, Planning Official
Ted Clark, Planning Official
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney
Susan Stephenson, Deputy City Clerk
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:05 p.m. in the Commission Chambers in City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised that anyone adversely affected by any decision
of the Development Code Adjustment Board may appear the decision to an Appeal Hearing Officer within two (2) weeks. He noted that Florida law requires any applicant appealing a decision
of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
ITEM A - (continued from 03/28/91) Frank C. and Suzanne K. Logan for variances of 1) 15.47 ft to permit deck 9.53 ft from a street right-of-way and 2) 7 ft to permit deck 3 ft from
a rear property line at 1035 Bay Esplanade, Carlouel Sub, Blk 273, Lot 1, zoned RS-8 (single family residential). V 91-19
Planning Official Clark explained the variance in detail and indicated that a portion of the deck has already been built without a permit. The deck will be 2 feet in height. The second
variance would not be needed if the deck is less than 12 inches high.
Harry Cline, representing the applicant, stated the existing deck and screen enclosure had termite damage and repairs were attempted. When it was determined that replacement would
be necessary, the existing deck and enclosure were removed and replacement of a portion of the deck was started. The proposed deck will be 40 to 50 square feet smaller than what existed
previously and, while it will be in the same general location, it will extend further north. The lot is small and the request will not have an adverse impact on the area. He pointed
out that the house is 24 inches above grade due to flooding over the sea wall.
Planning Official Hilton stated that if the elevation of the deck were less than 12 inches no variance would be needed.
Discussion ensued regarding review by the Board of Adjustment and Appeal on Building and Flood Control and whether or not it is better to construct the deck on one level or lower the
portion that has not yet been constructed to a height of less than 12 inches thereby eliminating the need for the second variance.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant variance #1 as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval
as listed in Section 137.012 (d) of the Land Development Code, more specifically because the particular shape, or topographical conditions of the property involved and the strict application
of the provisions of this development code would result in an unnecessary hardship upon the applicant subject to the conditions (1) the requisite variance is obtained from the Board
of Adjustment and Appeal on Building and Flood Control to place a structure less than 18 feet from a seawall and a copy of said variance is provided to the Planning and Development staff
prior to issuance of a building permit; and (2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months of the granting of this variance. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously. Request #1 granted.
Discussion ensued as to whether there was a hardship shown for the second variance. There was some discussion as to whether a deck of varying heights would be hazardous but feelings
in this regard varied.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to deny variance #2 as requested because the applicant has not demonstrated he has met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 137.012(d) of the Land Development Code because there is no condition which is unique to the property; no unnecessary hardship was shown; the variance is
not the minimum; and the granting of the variance would violate the general spirit and intent of this development code as expressed in Sections 131.005 and 131.006. The motion was duly
seconded and upon the vote being taken, Messrs. Plisko, Gans, Graham and Homer voted "aye;" Mrs. Whitney voted "nay." Motion carried. Request denied.
ITEM 1 - Pinellas County Board of Public Instruction for variances of 1) 90 ft to permit communication tower 150 ft high and 2) 45 ft to permit communications tower 30 ft from property
line at 2929 C.R. 193, Sec. 5-29-16, M&B 41.05, zoned P/SP (public/semi-public). V 91-20
The applicant requested by letter that this item be continued to the meeting of May 23, 1991.
Mr. Gans moved to continue this item to the meeting of May 23, 1991. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Gans requested that the following be investigated regarding their vehicle signs: Marina Restaurant, Beach Deli, Luccias By The "C", and Chubby's Breakfast.
Concern was expressed that the Police parking lot east of the railroad tracks does not conform to Code requirements.
Discussion ensued regarding the McDonald's lease. Some Board members would not have voted for approval of the variances requested by McDonald's if it were not for the conditions upon
which approval was granted. There was concern expressed that some of the conditions imposed are not being adhered to.
Vacation schedules of Board members was discussed. Mr. Gans stated he will not be present at the May 23 meeting and both meetings in October. Mr. Plisko stated he will miss the meeting
of June 27 and Mr. Homer will miss the meeting of May 23.
Discussion ensued regarding the scheduling of only one meeting a month if there are only a few cases. Planning Official Hilton expressed concerns about the delay in hearing requests
since the City is trying to promote a user friendly atmosphere. He stated their department has developed a study to indicate the stronger and weaker months. It was the consensus of
the Board to ask staff to investigate the feasibility of having only one meeting a month when the caseload is light and report back to the Board on their findings.
Mr. Plisko moved to approve the minutes of March 28, 1991 in accordance with copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 2:08 p.m.