06/22/1995 DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, June 22, 1995 - 1:00 p.m.
Commission Chambers, 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, FL
Members present:
Alex Plisko, Chair
Otto Gans
Joyce Martin
William Schwob
Members absent:
Emma Whitney, Vice Chair
Also present:
John Richter, Senior Planner, Central Permitting Department
Gwen Legters, Board Reporter, City Clerk Department
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall. He outlined procedures and advised anyone adversely affected by any decision of the
Development Code Adjustment Board may 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.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
Member Schwob moved to approve the minutes of June 8,1995, in accordance with copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The following variance requests were considered:
1. Lora A. Mentavlos and Stotts G. Boozer for a variance of 2 ft to permit a fence height of 6 ft where 4 ft maximum height is allowed in a structural setback from a street (Timbercrest
Circle) right-of-way where the property is not addressed from at 2360 Covington Dr., Woodgate of Countryside, Lot 194, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 95-31
Mr. Richter explained the application in detail, stating the applicants wish to enclose the rear and side yard of their single-family home with a six foot high fence. The proposed fence
is to be located three feet from the secondary frontage street. He noted other properties in the area enjoy similarly placed fences. The request was felt to be consistent with the
character and appearance of the neighborhood. The request appears to support all standards for approval subject to two standard conditions.
In response to a question, it was not known if permits were secured for the other six foot fences in the neighborhood.
Lora Mentavlos, the owner/applicant, stated the fence is needed for privacy and the safety of her three year old son. She explained the variance is needed to build the fence without
disturbing several large trees on the property.
Twelve letters of no objection from surrounding property owners were submitted for the record.
Concern was expressed the Board did not receive a site plan. Ms. Mentavlos stated she submitted the required number of copies with her application. In response to questions, Ms. Mentavlos
stated the fence is to be of six foot cypress board on board construction, situated outside the trees.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin 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 6 months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. HBE Florida Corporation (Adam's Mark Caribbean Gulf Resort) for a variance of 11 ft to permit a structural setback of 39 ft from the Gulf of Mexico where 50 ft is required at 430
S. Gulfview Blvd, Lloyd White-Skinner, Lots 33-35 and part of Lot 36, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial) & OS/R (Open Space/Recreation). V 95-32
Mr. Richter explained the application in detail. He stated the applicant wishes to shade the upper portion of the hotel deck with a canopy extending out 27 feet and spanning 90 feet
across the property. The proposal was not thought to have any adverse affect on the adjoining properties or the view due to the curvature of the shoreline.
Thomas Montgomery, representing the applicant, displayed and explained a site plan, drawing and photographs of the subject property. He stated the canopy is desired as an amenity for
the guests. Umbrellas are currently being used along the seawall; however are difficult to control in the wind. He stated the proposal is designed to stay within the confines of the
upper deck. The color and architectural construction will match the existing building.
Concern was expressed there are many small structures which do not appear on the plan. In response to a question, Mr. Montgomery stated one small building is a bandstand built on skids.
It was not known if the bandstand could be moved. Mr. Richter was requested to investigate if permits were obtained for the structure.
In response to a question, Mr. Montgomery stated the canopy is to be of aluminum and vinyl construction.
Bill Bretches, General Manager of the Adam's Mark Caribbean Gulf Resort, spoke in support of the application. Outlining the benefits of the proposal, he stated it will protect patrons
from the weather, blend aesthetically with the existing structure and increase the tax contribution to the city. Referring to photographs of the property, he demonstrated the area to
be covered.
One letter, from the adjacent property manager, was submitted in support of the application.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Schwob 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 6 months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
D. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS:
1. Ordinance 5860-95 of the City of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; amending Division 18 of Chapter 40, Code of Ordinances, to provide for revised requirements
for the North Greenwood Commercial District; amending Section 41.053, Code of Ordinances, to address conditional use supplementary standards for two conditional uses in the North Greenwood
Commercial District; providing an effective date.
Mr. Richter briefly outlined the proposed amendment. He stated it is based on the results of a study of the district by the Florida Center for Community Design and Research.
In response to a question regarding parking availability, Mr. Richter detailed the ample existing parking. Development is to be encouraged by not making parking a prerequisite.
It was noted conditional use applications for alcoholic beverages are sometimes controversial in this area. A question was raised if the language of this proposed amendment reflects
the Code changes recently adopted by the City Commission. Mr. Richter stated it does.
Member Schwob moved to recommend approval to the City Commission as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
E. CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS - None
F. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS - None
G. BOARD AND STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Richter expressed regret Ms. Whitney could not attend, as this is the last meeting of her term. It was indicated her service will be acknowledged by the City Commission.
Discussion ensued regarding the second page of the variance application form. It was noted a new form was designed with spaces for the applicant to detail compliance with the four standards
for approval. Staff was urged to use the new form for all future variance applications.
Mr. Richter introduced Bill Johnson, the new board member, who was in the audience.
Mr. Richter stated the next meeting is scheduled for July 13, 1995. It was not known why the meeting had been scheduled for July 6.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:34 p.m.
Chair