Loading...
10/12/1995 DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD October 12, 1995 Members present: Alex Plisko, Chair Otto Gans, Vice Chair Joyce Martin William Johnson William Schwob Also present: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney John Richter, Senior Planner, Central Permitting Department Gwen Legters, Board Reporter The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. 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. A. VARIANCE REQUESTS 1. Mary A. Meyers & Joseph Dydio, Trustee for a variance of 5.5 ft to permit a structural setback of 19.5 ft from a street (SR 580) right-of-way where 25 ft is required to allow an addition at 2704 Woodview Court, Wildwood of Countryside, Lot 40 less road right-of-way on S, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 95-50 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He stated the applicants wish to construct an addition to the rear of the single family home on an irregularly shaped, double frontage lot. The variance is needed because the widening of State Road 580 took approximately 18 feet off the rear of the property. Staff found the variance to be minimal and in conformance with existing conditions in the area. Staff recommended approval subject to two standard conditions. Mary Meyers, the owner/applicant, and Paul Dhaliwall, construction contractor, addressed the Board. Mr. Dhaliwall detailed conditions existing on the site, noting the proposal is to add two bedrooms and a family room to accommodate Ms. Meyers’ elderly mother. He stated the addition could have been accomplished without variances if not for the road widening. In response to a question, Mr. Dhaliwall said the addition will not include kitchen facilities. No one was present to speak in support or opposition to the request. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Member 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 six months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. Clearwater Free Clinic, Inc for a variance of 3.5 ft to permit a structural setback of 6.5 ft from side property line where 10 ft is required to allow an addition at 707 N Ft Harrison Ave, J.H. Rouse Sub, Blk 1, Lots 1,2,7 & 8, zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial) / RM 8 (Multi-Family Residential). V 95-51 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He stated the applicants wish to construct an addition on the south side of the existing free clinic. Staff found the design of the proposal logical, with no adverse spatial effect on adjacent uses and in character with other properties fronting on North Fort Harrison Avenue. Brenda Harris Nixon, President of the Clearwater Free Clinic board of directors, gave an overview of clinic operations and detailed the request. She stated additional space is needed for the pharmacy, privacy consultation room, onsite storage of patient records and a diabetic education classroom for their numerous diabetic patients. She said they are currently renting offsite storage to meet State records retention requirements which is expensive and inconvenient to access. She stated two recently acquired lots are to be rezoned for additional clinic parking. She said the new use will not affect the amount of parking needed, nor have an adverse impact on the community. They are proposing to have the only entrance from Seminole Street, blocking off the North Fort Harrison access. Ms. Nixon said, with an operating budget of about $55,000, the clinic treats more than 7,200 patients annually. She listed the medical and clerical personnel who donate their services and stated all the architectural, engineering, and site plan services for the project have been donated as well. The Kiwanis clubs raised the funds to build the original facility and are raising funds to finance the addition, which will not break ground until complete funding is in place. She said she is very proud of the agency, which can serve a patient for about $7.00. No one was present to speak in support or opposition to the request. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Member 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 six months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. Victor & Deniece Anglero, Jr. for a variance of 3.0 ft to permit a structural setback of 2.0 ft from side property line where 5 ft is required to allow a structure at 1166 Palmetto St., Springfield No. 2 Sub, Blk B-2, Lot 13 less street on S, zoned RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 95-52 Mr. Richter gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. He stated the applicants wish to build a new single family residence two feet from the west property line. This shift from the center of the lot is needed because the neighbor’s driveway to the east encroaches four feet onto the subject property. The request will not adversely affect the properties to the west as a 20 foot utility easement separates them from the subject property. E.J. Robinson, Construction Specialist for the Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services, represented the applicants. He explained the encroachment onto the subject property was not shown on the original survey and was discovered during inspection of the building foundation. A stop work order was issued. Mr. Robinson explained a number of options were considered and shifting construction three feet to the west was felt to be the best way to correct the problem without excessive additional expense. In response to questions, Mr. Robinson stated all parties will benefit from the proposal, as the property owner to the east will not have to move his driveway and the applicants can have their house. He said the property owner to the west has expressed an interest in selling the vacated portion of the easement to the applicant. A question was raised regarding a fence. Mr. Robinson said the applicants need it to protect their children. If the applicants can acquire the vacated portion, the fence will be built around the rear and west side of the property where no variance will be needed. A brief discussion ensued regarding fence height requirements. No one was present to speak in support or opposition to the request. Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Member 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(s) shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing; and 3) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, an access easement shall be recorded for the driveway encroachment. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 1. Ordinance 5921-95 of the City Of Clearwater, Florida, relating to the Land Development Code; creating Division 14 of Chapter 41, Code Of Ordinances, to establish development standards for parking garages; providing an effective date. Mr. Richter stated the proposed ordinance establishes parking garage regulations for regulate garage setbacks, landscaping and design. While the Board supported the ordinance in general, they did not agree with inclusion of the resort commercial and beach commercial districts in the ordinance. Not only was strong concern expressed with including these districts together with areas which have been designated as blighted, it was felt that more open space regulation is needed on the beach. The Board felt the beach is unique and did not agree with applying the same dimensional and numerical requirements for parking garages to commercial beach and resort areas. Member Gans moved to endorse Ordinance 5921-95 to the City Commission with a strong recommendation to amend Sec. 41.251, Definitions, to read, “‘Pedestrian-oriented zoning district’ shall mean the North Greenwood commercial district, and the Bayfront, Core and Eastern Corridor subdistricts of the urban center district.”, excluding reference to the resort commercial districts on Clearwater beach and the beach commercial district. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 28, 1995 - Approved as submitted Member Johnson moved to approve the minutes of September 28, 1995 in accordance with copies submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS - None E. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS - Introduction of Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides F. BOARD AND STAFF COMMENTS Member Martin questioned a memo from Scott Shuford regarding the extended sign amortization schedule to the end of fiscal year 1995/96. Mr. Richter said the memo was written in response to a DCAB inquiry regarding taking on sign variance hearings to help lighten the City Commission work schedule. Consensus of the Board was to restudy the issue once the Commission has met their objective to continue hearing sign variances through the end of the amortization period. Member Gans invited Mr. Shuford to attend a future DCAB meeting to explain Central Permitting staffing changes and work in process. G. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 1:58 p.m. Chair  Attest:   Board Reporter