Loading...
11/10/1994 MINUTES DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD Thursday, November 10, 1994 - 1:00 p.m. Members present: Alex Plisko, Chair Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chair Joyce E. Martin Otto Gans John B. Johnson Also present: John Richter, Senior Planner, Central Permitting Dept. Susan Stephenson, City Clerk Department The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall. Following 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. By motion duly seconded, the minutes of the October 17, 1994, meeting were approved as submitted. The following requests for extension, deferred and continued items were considered: B. 1 (A). (cont from 10/13/94) MDC Associates 81-A LTD/PNC Realty Holding Corp. for variances of (1) 1.5 ft to permit a 3.5 ft landscape buffer where 5 ft is required; (2) 3.5 ft to permit a 1.5 ft landscape buffer where 5 ft is required at 2670 & 2680 Gulf to Bay Blvd, Sec 17-29-16, M&B 23.10, zoned CG (General Commercial). V 94-58 Due to a tie vote from the Board, this item was continued from the October 13, 1994, meeting. Also, the Board suggested the applicant explore ways to save more trees. As a result, Mr. Richter indicated that the applicant has preliminarily redesigned the site plan to eliminate the need for a variance, and has withdrawn the application. B. 2 (B). (cont from 10/27/94) Grace E. Crawford/Cash America Pawn for variances of (1) 19.75 ft to permit a structural setback of 5.25 ft from a street (S Missouri Ave) right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (2) 7.5 ft to permit a side setback of 2.5 ft where 10 ft is required to allow a new awning at 1530 S Missouri Ave, Carolina Terrace, Blk C, Lots 8-11 & Lots 18-21 less street, zoned CG (General Commercial) & RM 8 (Multiple Family Residential). V 94-61 This item was continued from the October 27, 1994, meeting at the request of the applicant for a maximum of thirty days to examine other available options in an effort to solve the problem without resorting to a variance. Mr. Richter indicated the applicant has subsequently withdrawn the application. 3. (cont from 6/23/94 & 7/14/94 & 8/11/94) 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 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He said the applicant is requesting the setback variance to permit the construction of a new single family residential structure on Clearwater Beach, 20 ft. from a street right-of-way where 25 ft. is required. Existing homes on either side are 4 to 5 ft. from the street right-of-way. A recent code amendment recommendation to the City Commission will allow flexibility in setback based on the developed character of the lot. Also, the Flood Board has granted a variance with respect to the seawall allowing the home to be built up to or over the seawall. Staff recommended approval subject to standard conditions, with the added condition that the variance apply to lot 9 only. The applicant, Mr. Joseph Wells, 2087 Edgewater Drive, Unit F, Clearwater, owner of the property, indicated he purchased the property in August from Alan Tralins, who filed the original application as owner. He pointed out that the building line requested is consistent with properties in the area and would not have an adverse effect on neighboring properties. Replying to a concern with perpendicular parking, Mr. Wells noted a document entitled Existing Street Plan and explained that parking in front of the property was considered at the time his setback application was made. The seawall and buildable area over the seawall were discussed and Mr. Wells explained the topography of the properties. The Chairman noted the Building Department Code mandates construction be 18 ft. off the seawall. A brief discussion ensued relative to legal action involving construction on the sea side of the seawall and existence of a subsequent appeal; Mr. Lance indicated he believed an appeal was pending. There were no persons or documents presented in support of or opposition to the application. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney 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 Developoment 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(s) shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing; and 3) this variance will apply to lot 9 only. Mr. Shuford gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. (cont from 9/8/94 & 10/13/94) L.M. Loken (Imperial Square Produce Market) for a variance of 12 parking spaces to permit 15 parking spaces where 27 parking spaces are required to allow indoor and outdoor retail sales at 1496 S. Belcher Rd, Sec 24-29-15, M&B 41.05, zoned CG (General Commercial). V 94-51 The foregoing application was withdrawn by the applicant's representative. The following variance requests were considered: 3. Jerry H. Center, James H. Center, Martha A. Center, Sharon Beth Vogel, and Mildred H. Center, Trustees of the Mildred H. Center Rev. Tr., and Mildred H. Center, Jerry H. Center, James H. Center, Trustees of the Raymond H. Center Family Trust/Richards building for variances of (1) 23 ft to permit a structural setback of 2 ft from a street (S Lincoln Ave) right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (2) 15 ft to permit a structural setback of 10 ft from a street (Pierce St) right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (3) 13.8 percent to permit a maximum building coverage of 43.8 percent where a maximum of 30 percent is allowed, and (4) 25 percent to permit 5 percent of open space for the lot where 30 percent is required to allow new carports at 1253 Park St, Hibiscus Gardens, Blk D, Lots 9, 17, 18, and part of Lot 8, zoned OL (Limited Office). V 94-62 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case, presented in writing the staff recommendation, and referred to the site plan accompanying the application. He explained the property is an office building at the northeast corner of South Lincoln Avenue and Pierce Street and the request is for carports to cover seven of the thirty-three parking spaces, utilizing 1260 sq. ft. over the existing area. He indicated the special circumstances involve a row of oak trees located in the middle of the property and the angle of the parking spaces to the east of the oak trees. Staff felt the angle of parking would not be problematic; however, he stated the possibility of future problems lies with four young laurel oak trees on an island perpendicular to the building. In this regard, Mr. Richter indicated Mr. Alan Mayberry, City Forrester, offered to visit the property and provide recommendations. Mr. R. Carlton Ward, 1253 Park Street, Clearwater, said his law firm owns the building and leases the land from the Center family on a 75-year lease. He said the site plan shows the location of the proposed carports as two spaces to the north. This change was effected following a site visit and recommendation from a representative from Central Permitting Department. He questioned the feasibility of angle parking and described the parking area and planting of the oak trees. He submitted letters from neighbors indicating no objections to the proposed carports. It was noted that there was no dire need for the proposed carports and similar applications involving street right-of-ways had been denied. Asethetics and location of the carports was discussed. Mr. Ward questioned what constituted a roof and whether a trellis would be considered a structure; the Chairman indicated his belief that a trellis is not considered a structure. At this point, Mr. Ward requested a continuance in order that other options be explored without the need for readvertisement. Ms. Whitney moved to continue this item to the January 12, 1994 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. Anthony Alexiou/Frenchy's Rockaway Grill, Inc for variances (1) 13.22 ft to permit a lot depth of 86.78 ft where 100 ft is required; (2) 8.2 ft to permit a rear setback of 6.8 ft where 15 ft is required; (3) 14 percent to permit 11 percent of open space for the lot where 25 percent is required; (4) 3 additional parking spaces to permit 0 additional parking spaces where 3 additional parking spaces are required; and (5) 52.14 ft to permit a structure seaward of the Coastal Construction Line to allow an addition to an existing deck at 7 Rockaway St, Miller's Replat, Lots 2-3, together with vacated Beach Dr on West, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 94-63 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He indicated this was a series of five variances requested to expand the existing deck. The Planning & Zoning Board approved conditional use request CU 94-75 on September 13, 1994, with conditions. Mr. Richter said the proposed 650 sq. ft. deck area is surrounded by three buildings and is an otherwise unuseable area. Mr. Richter referred to a proposed outdoor cafe ordinance which would allow outdoor eating areas adjacent to a public sidewalk without additional parking. Staff feels that the proposed area is an extension of the existing approved deck and is a logical completion of the deck for the restaurant. A question was raised regarding the wall on the south side, bordering the Clearwater Beach Hotel. Attorney James Dowling, 1151 Tampa Road, Suite C, Palm Harbor, speaking for the applicant, reported the 6 ft. wall in question replaces a decorative railing and was included as a result of the conditional use hearing where concern was expressed that music would bother the neighboring hotel. He asked for a clarification of condition 5) there shall be no outdoor speakers on the deck. It was noted the proposed wall would be located nine ft. from the existing building; Mr. Richter indicated a distance of 15 ft. setback was required. The Chairman said a variance would be required to build the wall according to the conditions set by the Planning & Zoning Board. There were no persons or documents presented in support of or opposition to the application. In rebuttal, Mr. Dowling opined the proposed construction would be of benefit to the beach and consistent with the desireability of outdoor dining. In the ensuing discussion, the substantial number of variances requested was noted, as well as concern with establishing a precedent for future like applications. It was felt that the request was exclusively for the economic gain of the applicant and would not be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Code. Based on information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to deny the variances as requested because the applicant has not substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. Tom Sehlhorst for a variance of 8.09 ft to permit a structure 1.91 ft from a side (west) property line where 10 ft is required at 607-611 Palm Bluff St, Palm Bluff 1st Addition, Lots 26, 28, and 30, zoned CI (Infill Commercial). V 94-64 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He explained the side setback variance requested is to allow a building two ft. from the west side property line. The existing building, "E" on the site plan, lacks hurricane anchors and a setback variance must first be approved before structural changes can be made. He noted the original building was constructed three to five years ago without a building permit; however, staff recommends approval with the standard two conditions adding that eight parking spaces be provided to serve the property's uses. In the ensuing discussion, it was agreed that a variance would be required to provide the eight parking spaces. Mr. Richter noted the applicant has made considerable progress correcting problems and complying with other variances, and said the variance could be granted with the condition that parking spaces be provided. He explained the three-month building permit requirement is an effort to expedite the project. The applicant, Mr. Tom Sehlhorst, 611 Palm Bluff Street, Clearwater, distributed a map to the Board members indicating rezoning of the property to CI, now 7,500 ft. He described the garage location, topography of the lot, and history of the property. He relayed that plans were reviewed and approved by the City in 1993, and his difficulties building a garage, indicating the zoning change will now permit a garage to be built. He noted his problem was with paving of the 16 space parking area, and he proposed the use of tile; the Chairman indicated paving was required according to Code. Mr. Bob Bickerstaffe, 1007 East Druid Road, Clearwater, spoke in support of the application. He praised the applicant for developing the area and opined the City should help in any way possible. He envisioned area growth and improvement for the City. The Chairman noted the building was originally constructed illegally without a permit; Mr. Bickerstaffe suggested the area was unique, and different rules might be implemented to allow flexibility. In the ensuing discussion, Chairman Plisko agreed the applicant has done an outstanding job with this property, but reiterated the building was built illegally without proper design and inspection, and variances sought after the fact. Concern was expressed that staff not be blamed for inflexibility. It was stressed that staff is not the grantor of variances, but merely gives advice; the Board makes the decision and can only grant what the Code allows, notwithstanding personal inclinations. Mr. Richter pointed out the area has been improved with both new construction and removal of 100 or more structures with violations of the building code. Documents presented in support of the application were noted. There were no persons or documents presented in opposition. In rebuttal, Mr. Sehlhorst said all neighbors signed a petition asking for approval of the request. He noted three zoning changes, and said matters of survey, engineer, permit and inspection have been addressed and hurricane anchors were the last requirement. Replying to a parking question, Mr. Richter noted eight parking spaces would be required for lot 26. The Chairman suggested the applicant indicate available parking spaces for the property and submit a variance for the deficient spaces; Mr. Richter agreed. A Unity of Title for lots 26, 28 and 30 with parking on one of the lots was suggested, and it was suggested a greater effort could be made by the applicant to abide by the Code. Mr. Richter supported a Unity of Title which would allow parking spaces across lot line, eliminate the need for landscape buffers and simplify design requirements. It was suggested the application be continued and include the parking variances required for the setback. The Chairman suggested the applicant meet with staff to determine the number of spaces needed for the three lots, striping be inspected and determination made if spaces are legal in number. Mr. Richter said a plan would be required indicating location of parking spaces, pending approval of traffic engineer. Mr. Gans moved to continue this item to the January 12, 1995, meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Sehlhorst will work with staff to determine a means for final resolution of the parking requirements. The meeting recessed at 3:16 p.m., reconvening at 3:21 p.m. 6. Lighthouse Towers Condominium Association for a variance of 46 ft to permit a 4 ft fence seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line at 1290 Gulf Blvd, Lighthouse Towers Condo, zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residential) and OS-R (Open Space-Recreational). V 94-65 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He explained the fence requested will surround the pool area and extend 36 feet seaward of the coastal construction control line and is similar to neighboring approved fences and does not adversely affect other properties. Staff recommends approval subject to conditions. The applicant and manager of Lighthouse Towers, Mr. Fred Fogg, 525 Johns Pass Avenue, Madiera Beach, noted the fencing will not completely surround the pool because the area includes hedges which will serve as part of the fence line. He said he understood the coastal construction control line was put in after the building was built. Although other condominium owners in the area have not desired to construct fences as a detriment to the asthetics of the properties, on May 3, 1994, a fence was mandated by their insurance company, put out to bid, and a variance requested due to coastal construction control line. Replying to a question, Mr. Fogg indicated the insurance company will accept use of the hedge as a barrier. There were no persons or documents presented in support of or opposition to the application. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans 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 Developoment 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(s) shall be obtained within 12 months from the date of this public hearing; 3) the fence shall be only four feet high with aluminum railings and constructed as indicated on the site plan; and 4) all necessary permits shall be obtained by the applicant from other applicable State and City review agencies and boards. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7. Daniel W. Cockerham for a setback variance of 25 ft to permit addition zero ft from Pleasant Street right-of-way, rather than the 25 ft setback required at 1735 Sunset Dr, North Shore Park, Blk 7, Lots 10,11,12, and part of Lot 13, zoned RS 8 (Residential Single Family). V 94-66 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He explained the request is for a variance to construct a proposed second floor study room 399 sq. ft. in floor area located above an existing concrete garage without setback. He noted site plan and special circumstances warranting approval of the variance, i.e., the neighborhood already has varying setbacks. He described the neighborhood as fragile and sensitive. The property owner and applicant, Mr. Daniel W. Cockerham, 1735 Sunset Drive, Clearwater, described the property, built by Roebling in 1930, and the proposed art-study addition which will overlook the inland waterway. He assured the Board the proposed addition is not intended to convert the home to a two-family residence. Mr. Cockerham indicated he believed the lots have Unity of Title as one unit at the present time. Mr. Richter said the staff report indicates an adjustment would be needed with the common lot line between lots 11 and 12 because the existing building is closer than five ft. to the lot line. He suggested three options: 1) a Unity of Title tying the property together; 2) a request for a side setback variance; or 3) a request for an administrative lot division to move the lot line to provide the five ft.. setback. A discussion ensued relative to subdivision and possible future sale of the property. The Chairman suggested an added condition for Unity of Title to be based upon determination of need by the City Attorney. There were no persons or documents presented in support of or opposition to the application. Concern was expressed relative to adding to a non-conformity. It was agreed the addition would be in keeping with the historic nature of the existing residence. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans 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 Developoment 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(s) shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing; and 3) prior to issuance of a building permit if determined to be necessary by the City Attorney, a Unity of Title shall be recorded that ties the property east of Lot 12 under one ownership or otherwise the applicant shall obtain a variance to the setback from that property line. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The following Land Development Code Amendments were considered: ORDINANCE NO. 5683-94 OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING SECTION 42.28, CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO REQUIRE VEGETATIVE BUFFER SETBACKS ADJACENT TO "JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS" UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Following explanation of the ordinance by Mr. Richter and a brief discussion, Mr. Johnson moved to recommend approval to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The following are Board and Staff comments: Responding to a question from Mr. Richter, the Board members indicated they were receiving supplements to the Land Development Code. There being no further business, by motion duly seconded, the meeting adjourned at 3:53 p.m. ____________________________________ Alan Plisko, Chairman Minutes prepared by Sally Demarest