01/12/1995 MINUTES
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, January 12, 1995 - 1:00 p.m.
Commission Chambers, 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater FL
Members present:
Alex Plisko, Chair
Emma C. Whitney, Vice-Chair
Otto Gans
Members absent:
John B. Johnson
Joyce E. Martin
Also present:
Lance Miles, Assistant City Attorney (arrived 1:26 p.m.)
John Richter, Senior Planner, Central Permitting Dept.
Sally Demarest, Board Reporter (arrived 1:16 p.m.)
Gwen Letgers, Staff Assistant II (left 1:17 p.m.)
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1:05 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall. Ms. Whitney led 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 file an appeal through the City Clerk Department 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. Mr. Plisko noted the three members present and said an affirmative
vote of three members is required to grant in favor of the variance and, an applicant may request a continuance.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
The minutes of the December 8, 1994 meeting were approved as submitted.
The following variance requests were considered:
B1. (cont from 11/10/94) 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) 15 ft to permit a structural setback of 10 ft from a street (Pierce
St) right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (2) 13.8 percent to permit a maximum building coverage of 43.8 percent where a maximum of 30 percent is allowed; and (3) 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
Senior Planner John Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated three variances are requested to construct new
freestanding carports. The application was continued from the last meeting so the carports, now in the middle of the property, could be relocated. The property is zoned OL and the
principal use of is an office building.
Attorney Carlton Ward, 1253 Park Street, Clearwater, said handicapped parking is located in the center aisle and the dumpster is on the southwest side of the building, which precluded
locating carports there.
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 Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant
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) the carports shall be constructed as indicated on the site plan and limited only to the location and size of
seven carports. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B2. (cont from 11/10/94) 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 application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the applicant is requesting a side setback variance in order to
upgrade an existing nonconforming building by installing a hurricane anchor to bring the structure to Code. Improvements to existing properties have already begun with building permits
and Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City for buildings C, D, B, and H as shown on the site plan. No additional parking is required for this particular building and use.
The applicant, Tom Sehlhorst, 611 Palm Bluff Street, Clearwater, asked for a continuance before making his presentation. The Chairman advised Mr. Sehlhorst to make his presentation
and request continuance after discussion of the Board if he chose to do so. He presented two documents: 1) the occupational license for the present business; and (2) evidence that
the subject building, 22' x 23', has been on the tax rolls since 1992. He emphasized he is talking only about lot 26 and not the lot next door.
There were three letters in support of the application; there were two letters from the same individual in opposition. There were no persons to speak in support of or opposition to
the application.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant and Mr. Shuford, Director of Central Planning, Mr. Gans moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has or will
have substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique
to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant 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 three months from the date of this public hearing; and 3) the progress of this development be closely
supervised by the Central Permitting Department to ensure that everything is within the letter of the Code. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Sehlhorst indicated for the record he was against the decision and felt his rights were violated. He said it was his understanding that staff recommended an eight car parking lot.
He was advised by the Chairman that the variance had been granted, and to address the matter with Central Permitting or City Clerk Department.
B3. Vaugh & Margaret Haight (Discount Auto Parts) for variances of (1) 8 ft to permit a side setback of 12.5 ft where 20 ft is required; and (2) 8 percent to permit 42 percent of open
space for the front yard where 50 percent is required to allow a new retail store at 22991 U.S. 19 N, Sec 08-29-16, M&B 22.04, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). V 95-01
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommen-dations. He indicated this is an L-shaped parcel and the proposed building will occupy
6,743 square feet. The vacant restaurant on the site will be demolished and a discount auto parts store constructed in its place. There are over 60 parking spaces on the premise; 40
are required. Neighboring apartment buildings are not in close proximity and the front section of the property is the subject of a DOT acquisition of 24 feet for road improvements;
the applicant has considered this in his plan for parking.
Todd Pressman, 28870 US Highway 19 North, Clearwater, speaking for the applicant, stated the proposed discount auto site was formerly Artimus Restaurant. There exist significant trees
and green growth between the subject premise and the neighboring apartment buildings. He explained the configuration of the property, the DOT acquisition, addition of greenspace and
subsequent rearrangement of the parking area.
Responding to a question from the Board, Mr. Pressman said he did not meet the Traffic
Engineer at the site, but did meet with Mr. Etim Udoh there. The DRC has reviewed the site and approved it.
The placement of the single driveway was questioned; Mr. Pressman said DOT has approved the driveway location. He said to the best of his knowledge there has not been a problem at that
point. It was mentioned the proposed new business would be compatible with the existing service station on the corner.
There were no persons or documents 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 Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant
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; and 2) the requisite building permit(s)
shall be obtained within 12 months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B4. Russell & Barbara Dilley, Jr. (Personalties, Inc.) for variances of (1) 8 ft to allow a minimum structural setback from the centerline of the right-of-way of U.S. 19 of 167 ft where
175 ft is required; and (2) 3 additional parking spaces to allow 0 additional parking spaces where 3 additional parking spaces are required at 20866 U.S. 19 N, Sec 18-29-16, M&B 14.11,
zoned CH (Highway Commercial). V 95-02
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommen-dations. He indicated the applicant is requesting approval to replace a deteriorating
wood support wall on the north east side of the existing one story nightclub building. The proposed extension will add 136 square feet of floor area to the office space, and will be
used for storage of records. Staff indicates the parking variance causes the overall nonconformity to increase to 33%, a significant reduction. Mr. Richter acknowledged that the parking
spaces were unclear on the site plan.
The property owner, Russell Dilley, 2870 Phillippe Parkway, Safety Harbor said there was no intention to intrude on handicapped spaces. The proposed addition will replace the 5 foot
planter. He said the existing office was formerly a clothes closet and is four feet wide; the additional space is needed for storage. Mr. Dilley said the Fire Department representative
agreed the proposed wall will help to fireproof the area.
The business owner, Greg Rose, 20866 US Highway 19 North, Clearwater, said the back property owner will relocate his fence, providing additional parking; he was informed the Code requires
that all parking must be paved.
Mr. Dilley distributed an additional site plan. The Chairman suggested continuance and submission of the site plan to the Traffic Engineer to determine whether it conforms to the City's
parking requirements.
Mr. Gans moved to continue the request to January 26, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B5. John Zammetti (Light Club #7, Inc.) for a variance of 54 parking spaces to allow 0 parking spaces where 54 parking spaces are required at 315-321 Ft. Harrison Ave, Fort Harrison,
Lots 2 & 3, zoned CG (General Commercial). V 95-03
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommen-dations. He indicated the subject vacant building was used as a book store and is zoned
CG. It is proposed for use as a youth club for neighborhood kids to be opened on Friday and Saturday evenings only, serving children who do not drive. Parking for two staff members
would be required, which the Salvation Army across the street has agreed to provide.
Kenneth Vogel, 29836 69th Way North, Clearwater, speaking for the applicant, indicated there are special circumstances concerning this property. He said the property is landlocked from
the rear. He described the business as a youth ministry for non-driving youngsters in their early teens as an alternative to "hanging out" on the streets. Mr. Vogel added all facilities
of the club are free for the youth.
John Zammetti, 6891 San Jose Loop, New Port Richey, reiterated the club would be open on Friday and Saturday only.
There were no persons or documents in support of or opposition to the application.
It was agreed, although the parking variance appeared excessive, the fact that the facility is for non-driving youth would justify granting a variance.
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 Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant
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 shall
be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing; 3) the operation of the facility shall be limited to juveniles use only; and 4) the facility shall be opened only
two days in a week on Fridays and Saturdays from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; 5) facility shall be for the operation of a juvenile youth game center and
will be operated in accordance with the conditions set forth in item 4; the variance will expire upon the termination of Mr. Zammetti/Light Club #7, Inc. operation of this facility as
a youth game center; and 6) letter from the Salvation Army dated November 18, 1994 granting permission for a limited number of parking spaces for employees of this establishment is made
part of the record. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B6. Lyle G. & Mildred H. Mitchell for variances of (1) 2 ft to permit a fence of 6 ft where a 4 ft maximum height is allowed in a structural setback from a street (S. Lady Mary Dr.)
right-of-way where the property is not addressed from; (2) 3 ft to permit a fence and wall setback of 0 ft from a street (S. Lady Mary Dr.) right-of-way where 3 ft is required; and (3)
3 ft to provide 0 ft of landscape buffer where 3 ft is required at 1326 Pierce St, Hibiscus Gardens, Blk X, Lot 2 and South half of vacated Park St, zoned RM 20 (Multiple Family Residential).
V 95-04
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the subject property is an extraordinarily small lot with a four-unit
apartment building, adding the applicant proposes to remove the existing four foot chain link fence and replace it with a six foot high wood fence. The layout would include the fence
coming on to the east property line, which is the west right-of-way line, for Lady Mary Drive. Mr. Richter said staff recommended approval of the height variance, but could not justify
the setback or landscape variances. Staff feels the fence should be set back three feet from the right-of-way, with landscaping on the right-of-way side of the fence.
The owner of the property, Pat Wilson, 1326 Pierce Street, Clearwater, said she purchased the property on December 29, 1994, and described police activity in the area, homeless traffic
and persons sleeping in the yard to justify the additional fence height. Ms. Wilson said she intends to use xeriscape plants from the proposed zero setback fence line to the street
for aesthetics and to deter transients. She complained about debris surrounding an adjacent vacant Morrison's restaurant.
A question was raised relative to a barking dog; Ms. Wilson said her two dogs will be penned within a chain link fence inside the wood fence.
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 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant
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; and 2) the requisite building permit(s)
shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to deny the variances (2) and (3) 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, more specifically because there are not special circumstances related to the particular physical surroundings, shape
or topographical conditions applicable to the land or buildings, or such circumstances are not peculiar to such land or buildings and do not apply generally to the land or buildings
in the applicable zoning district. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B7. City National Bank of Florida, TRE (Mandalay Shores Apartments) for a variance to allow a 3.5 ft high fence within the rear structural setback area of a waterfront property where
it is prohibited at 880 Mandalay Ave, Mandalay, Blk 21, Tracts 1,1A,2,2A,3,3A,4,4A,5, and 5A of unplatted Blk 21, and rip rights, zoned RM 29 (Multiple Family Residential). V 95-05
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the subject property is an apartment building zoned RM-28. He
noted City ordinance precludes fences on any waterfront property within the structural setback area adjoining the water; however, nonopaque fences located within ten feet of the edge
of any swimming pool shall be permitted to a maximum hieght of 42 inches. The request is for a fence 3-1/2 feet high abutting Lady Mary Drive, for safety of the pool and to satisfy
an insurance obligation.
Representing the applicant, Rene Andreatta, 880 Mandalay Drive, Clearwater, explained the insurance company's request and safety requires installation of a fence around the pool. The
coastal line/property line is along the sea wall. The Chairman noted the absence of authorization by the property owner for Mr. Andreatta to speak, and the Board agreed it would be
necessary to continue the item.
Ms. Whitney made a motion to continue V-95-05 until the January 26, 1995 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B8. Alpha Beach Resort, Inc./Stephen Ginez (Quality Inn Beach Resort) for variances of (1) 6 percent to permit a minimum open space for the lot of 19 percent where 25 percent is required;
and (2) 25.4 ft to permit 24 ft of continuous clear space where 49.4 ft is required to allow a new parking structure at 655 S. Gulfview Blvd, Bayside Sub. No. 5, Blk C, Lots 8-11, zoned
CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 95-06
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the property is on the south end of Clearwater beach and the construction
will be a new one story elevated parking deck over the existing parking area, west of the motel building. Mr. Richter explained the two variances. He said there are presently 91 parking
spaces on the site for 91 motel units and a 60-seat restaurant, and the owner is requesting relief from resultant parking difficulties. It was noted structures with a height of over
20 feet are
required to have a setback equal to 15 feet plus 25% of the height of the structure above 20 feet; according to the plan, the structure is proposed to be set back 16 feet from the rear
property line.
The applicant's representative, Mr. Bob Fuks, Contemporary Designs, 1860 Murray Avenue, Clearwater, said he met with City staff, and described the design of his addition, saying it will
result in 21per cent additional open space. He indicated the height of the parking structure will be 9 feet six inches to the deck.
Guy Jasmine, 20000 US Highway 19 North, Clearwater, General Manager of the subject motel, disputed the negative impact on the neighboring property. He noted the present parking garage
is only nine feet six inches high and sixty feet away from Econolodge and mentioned the additional green space.
Attorney David Foster, 555 4th Street North, St. Petersburg, attorney for Ted and Maria Leonard, owners of the adjacent property to the west of the subject property, spoke in opposition
to the application. He cited individually the four conditions for denial noting each one is applicable to this request. He said the most serious defect in the application is that it
will be materially injurious of the property owned by his clients with less open space and a blocked view.
Rebutting, Mr. Fuks the application will permit approximately 50 additional parking spaces, for a total 145 parking spaces.
In the ensuing discussion, it was noted the application appeared to meet all standards for denial. Concern was expressed that the parking plan for this substantial structure has not
been reviewed or approved by the Traffic Engineer and whether the proposed additional parking met the needs of citizens. The Chairman doubted whether the proposal created a negative
impact and suggested the applicant work closely with the City to obtain approvals before resubmission to the Board.
Ms. Whitney made a motion to continue V-95-06 until the February 9, 1995 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The Board recessed at 3:03 p.m., reconvening at 3:10 p.m.
B9. Donald W. Johnson for a variance of 4.5 ft to permit a structural setback of 20.5 ft from a street (Lotus Path) right-of-way where 25 ft is required to allow a new detached single
family dwelling at 316 Lotus Path, Corrected Map of Harbor Oaks, Lot 133 and part of Lots 131 & 135, zoned RS 6 (Single Family Residential). V 95-07
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the subject property is in the Harbor Oaks Subdivision and contains
numerous specimen oak trees. To save the majority of the trees, the applicant proposes to move the proposed building 4.5 feet forward on the lot. Mr. Richter reported no other applications
for variances for this premise.
Representing the applicant, Attorney Tim Johnson, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater described the premise and pointed out it is not in the historic portion of Harbor Oaks but a relatively
new family home. The purpose of the variance is to save three specimen oak trees. The garage has already been shortened two feet. He cited other setback variances in the area. He
noted staff's support of the request and a neighbor's letter in support.
Speaking in opposition, the owner of the adjacent property, Michael McQuigg, 310 Lotus Path, Clearwater identified himself as a Director of the Harbor Oaks Owner's Association. He
said he opposed the application because 1) it does not meet the code of 25 feet; 2) it would present a problem when parking a middle to large size car in front of the garage; and 3)
it would inhibit the view from his front porch. He described past meetings and attempts to reach an amicable agreement with the applicant.
Robert Kern, 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater noted a letter dated January 10, 1995 from Mr. Salterelli, President of the Harbor Oaks Association, which Mr. Kern claimed was delivered to the
City Clerk. There was no record of its receipt. Mr. Kern read the letter of opposition from the homeowners requesting modification of the plan to require a 25 foot setback. An additional
letter in opposition was received from one of the signers of the letter above.
Rebutting, Mr. Johnson said the distance between the back of curb and the property line in Harbor Oaks is very generous, in this case 21-1/2 feet. He said he does not envision a problem
parking in the driveway as his extended cab pickup truck parks there comfortably. He disagreed that the proposed building would block the view from the porch of the adjacent premise.
Any and all alternatives suggested, such as "flipping the house," would cause all trees in the backyard to be removed. He said he was surprised by the homeowners' "ambush" as past
meetings with them led him to believe everyone was in accord.
In the ensuing discussion, Mr. Richter provided setback distance requirements; it was agreed that a 4-1/2 foot variance request was minimal. The owner was credited for past efforts
to save the specimen oak trees.
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 Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant
subject to the following conditions: moved to grant the request 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; and 2) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
B10. Cypress Point Holding Corp (Buffalo's Cafe) for a variance of 30 ft to permit a side setback of 20 ft where 50 ft is required at 25801 U.S. 19 N, Cypress Point Shopping Center,
Lot 1, zoned CC (Commercial Center).
Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the staff recommen-dations. He indicated the deck and proposed canopy will extend approximately 10 feet
out from the existing building, positioned 20 feet from the side property line where 50 feet would ordinarily be required. He said the required three additional parking spaces are available.
The applicant, Clifford Soechtig, President of CJS Investments, Inc., 2417 Huntington Boulevard, Safety Harbor identified himself as the owner/franchisee of Buffalo's Cafe. He indicated
his architect was present to answer technical questions. He said the front canopy is needed to protect patrons from inclement weather. The deck is a integral part of the franchise
concept and all existing Buffalo's restaurants feature decks for outside dining. Proposed deck seating is eight tables of four diners each.
Steve Spencer, Spencer & Jonnatti, Architects, 1661 East Bay Drive, Clearwater said the parking issue was addressed and he was informed additional parking was not required. He said
a site visit will reveal 1) the front canopy is standard and no different from the existing shopping center canopy; 2) the covered deck, designed by a Georgia architect, does not cause
a hardship to surrounding properties. He said a continuance may prove a hardship to the owner in the opening of his restaurant.
In the ensuing discussion it was noted the absence of two Board members today may adversely affect the decision of the Board on the issue of the deck. Mr. Spencer requested a continuance
on the matter of the deck and the Chairman agreed, indicating this will allow staff to further investigate the number of parking spaces at the site now and the number originally granted.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant approval for the canopy only as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards
for approval for the canopy as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not
caused by the owner or applicant 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) appropriate transportation impact fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of the
building permit; and to continue the deck portion of the application to January 26, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The following Land Development Code Amendments were considered:
D1. Ordinance No. 5713-94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Sections 44.05, 44.51, and 44.57, Code of Ordinances, to regulate neon
and other forms of exposed signs or lighting, providing an date.
Mr. Richter gave the background of the proposed code amendment and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations. He indicated the amendment provides that:: 1) neon used to accentuate
architectural features will be allowed without regulation; and 2) neon unrelated to architectural features would be regulated and measured against sign areas.
The Board particularly noted staff recommends deletion of the provision on p. 1 which states, "Also, any portion of the surface area of a freestanding sign structure that exceeds 50
percent of the permitted area of the sign face shall be considered part of the sign area."
Ms. Whitney moved to recommend endorsement to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
D2. Ordinance No. 5720-94 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Section 41.053, Code of Ordinances, to reduce the minimum lot area requirement
for manufacturing uses in the Infill Commercial Zoning District; creating Section 42.36 Code of Ordinances, to prohibit driveway access for nonresidential uses across residential zoning
districts; providing an effective date.
Mr. Richter gave the background of the proposed code amendment and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations, saying this amendment will reduce the lot size in the Infill Commercial
zone and provide greater sensitivity to driveway accesses on commercial property opposite residential properties, unless the property were landlocked and there was no other option to
place the driveway elsewhere. In such a case, the application would be reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer and Central Permitting Director.
Mr. Gans moved to recommend endorsement to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
D3. Ordinance No. 5740-95 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Section 41.171, Code of Ordinances, to revise requirements for temporary
commercial parking lot uses; providing an effective date.
Mr. Richter gave the background of the proposed code amendment and presented, in writing, the staff recommendations, indicating this will allow temporary parking on private property
zoned C-28 and Beach Commercial zones.
The Board particular noted the sentence on p 1 which reads, "In no case shall parking spaces wholly or partially owned by the City of Clearwater be used as part of temporary commercial
parking lot."
It was strongly emphasized that the Commission be advised of the Board's concurrence with this
stipulation.
Mr. Gans moved to recommend endorsement to the City Commission with the provision that the Commission be made aware that the Board agrees that in no case shall parking spaces wholly
or partially owned by the City of Clearwater be used as part of the temporary commercial parking lot. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.