Loading...
08/11/1994 DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD August 11, 1994 Members present: Alex Plisko, Chair Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chair Joyce E. Martin John B. Johnson Absent: Otto Gans (excused) Also present: John Richter, Senior Planner, Central Permitting Department Miles A. Lance, Assistant City Attorney Gwen Legters, Board Secretary The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall. _________ lead the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation. Mr. Plisko outlined procedures and advised anyone adversely affected by any decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may appeal the decision to an Appeal Hearing Officer within two weeks. He noted 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. I. Public Hearings Item A - (cont. from 7/28/94) Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. for variances of (1) 8 ft to permit a setback of 17 ft from a street right-of-way (Jurgens St) where 25 ft is required; (2) 15 ft to permit a setback of 10 ft from a street right-of-way (Metto St) where 25 ft is required; (3) 32 ft to permit a minimum lot depth of 78 ft where 110 ft is required for a double frontage lot to allow a new detached single family dwelling at 913 Jurgens St, Palm Park Replat, Blk B, Lots 3 and 4, zoned RM 8 (Multi-Family Residential). V 94-40 Item B - (cont. from 7/28/94) Steven R. and Carolanne Krakower/Red Ribbon Homestead for a variance of 7 parking spaces to permit zero additional parking spaces required for a change of use to a Level II group care facility where 7 parking spaces are required at 1109-1131 Pinellas St, Georgas Sub, Lots 2, 3, 13, 14 and 15, zoned RM 12 (Multi-Family Residential). V 94-42 Senior Planner Richter explained the application in detail, stating the applicant, Red Ribbon Homestead, Inc., is requesting approval of a parking variance to change the existing use of the southern portion of the subject property to a Level II Group Care facility, thereby reducing the number of units to 24 from the original development as a 32-unit multi-family residence. Building 1123, on the site plan, was approved by the City and is currently used as a family care facility for five persons. The applicant wants to increase this use by converting buildings 1115, 1117, and 1121, on the site plan, to serve 20 AIDS patients. Properties north and west of the subject property will remain as apartment units. The proposal also requires conditional use approval. The change in use requires seven parking spaces that comply with the zoning code design requirements. The design of the existing 32 on-site parking spaces requires vehicles to back-out into the street right-of-way. None meets current code standards. A variance is requested to permit the eight spaces allotted to the eight affected units to serve the proposed group care use. The Traffic Engineer has indicated that allowing an additional variance of seven spaces will add to the overall parking problems for existing units. Central Permitting staff notes, however, that parking spaces will continue to exist as back-out ones even if this variance is denied. None of the buildings is to be demolished. The applicant maintains not enough room exists to construct parking spaces that conform with code requirements. Hardship is based on the location of existing buildings and the size of the overdeveloped lot. Staff feels apparent hardship exists. There is no onsite vacant area for additional parking. The street serving the property is not likely to be heavily used since it is currently serving limited use to the east. The variance requested is minimal and may be granted based on the intended use which is for the public interest. 1. (cont. from 7/14/94) Alan H. Tralins for a variance of 5 ft to permit construction of a home 20 ft from a street right-of-way (Eldorado Ave) at 1010 Eldorado Ave, Mandalay Sub, Blk 69, Lots 8 & 9, land fronting the gulf and riparian rights, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 94-33 Senior Planner Richter explained the application in detail, stating the applicant is requesting a setback variance of five feet to permit construction of a single family residence 20 feet from a street right-of-way. Unique physical barriers at the site impose hardship on the applicant. According to the application, the platted lot is restricted on the west by an existing seawall, reducing the buildable lot dimensions by approximately 25%. Front setbacks of existing area structures, some built prior to current code, vary. Staff feels the request supports the conditions of approval primarily due to the location and setbacks of existing area structures. The requested variance is minimal to allow the construction of the proposed building. Granting the variance will not adversely impact adjoining properties. 2. Grand Prix, Ltd. for a variance of 20 percent to permit 30 percent front yard open space where 50 percent is required at 1880 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, Sec 13-29-15, M&B 23.06, 23.07 and Skycrest Unit D, Blk A, part of Lot 5 & part of strip west of Lot 5, zoned CG (General Commercial). V 94-45 Senior Planner Richter explained the application in detail, stating the applicant requests approval to resurface the front yard service area of the Grand Prix Car Wash, built in 1960, by replacing cracked concrete and interlocking red bricks. A variance for the front yard open space is required because the existing structure's 30% open space does not meet the required 50% open space established for this zoning district. The proposed resurfacing requires the entire front yard to be brought into compliance with current development code requirements. This type of improvement typically results in the need for a variance to the Land Development Code. The applicant indicates it would be difficult to maintain a viable car wash business without benefit of a variance. The existing structure's layout causes the applicant hardship and prevents the applicant from meeting the front yard open space requirement. However, there may be an opportunity to provide a small amount of landscaped space in areas not required for vehicular circulation. The facility's primary use is commercial. Staff feels, due to the building's location, it is unlikely the applicant can provide the full complement of open space. The variance arises from a condition unique to the subject property. Apparent hardship exists due to the orientation of structures built prior to the establishment of current code. Improvements permitted by the variance will enhance the front yard's appearance. No negative impact on adjoining properties is anticipated. II. Approval of Minutes - July 14, 1994 III. Board & Staff Discussion IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at ______ p.m. Chairman