Loading...
02/13/1997DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER February 13, 1997 Present: Otto Gans William Schwob William Johnson Mark Jonnatti Ron Stuart Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member   Leslie Dougall-Sides John Richter Gwen Legters Assistant City Attorney Senior Planner Board Reporter   The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. in Harborview Center Ballroom A, followed by the meeting procedures and the appeal process. To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. B. Continued Variance Requests B1. (Cont. from 1/23/97) Robert A. Smith a setback variance of 20 ft to allow a storage shed 5 ft from the South Street right-of-way where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required at 1349 S Washington St, Lake View Heights, Blk H, Lot 1, zoned RS 8 (Residential Single Family.) VR 97-06 Mr. Richter reported the applicant has indicated to Central Permitting staff he does not wish to pursue this variance request. Because the application was filed as a result of code enforcement action, Mr. Richter requested board action on this item. Member Johnson moved to deny the variance(s) 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. C. New Variance Requests C1. Florida Power Corp./Discount Auto Parts, Inc. (Famous Cigars, Inc.) for a parking variance to permit an unpaved parking lot where durable, all-weather surface is required at 25032 US 19 N, Sec 31-28-16, M&B’s 44.01 and 44.02, zoned CH (Highway Commercial) and P/SP (Public/Semi-Public). V 97-10 Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant wishes to use an existing, unoccupied building as a cigar store and bar. He outlined how the applicant proposes to mitigate parking difficulties on the small site through an agreement to lease adjacent Florida Power right-of-way. Mr. Richter detailed parking requirements, stating the applicant has proposed a reasonable solution and conditions favor variance approval. Staff recommended approval with two standard conditions. Questions were raised regarding traffic circulation, a driveway marked with wooden stakes on the Florida Power right-of-way. Garat Oates and Albert Salazar, authorized representatives, stated they wish to convert an existing building into an upscale cigar retail store and cigar-friendly bar. The unoccupied building was formerly used as a Discount Auto Parts store. Mr. Oates profiled the limited parking on site, and explained their plan to set up and maintain the adjacent unpaved parking area. Discussion ensued regarding traffic ingress/egress and the wooden stakes separating the driveway from the parking area. The applicants responded to questions regarding operation of the business, comparing it to similar establishments in Naples, Orlando, and Winter Park, Florida. It was indicated occasional music may be provided by a 2-3 piece jazz band. Concern was expressed with the potential of the business to disturb residents of the adjacent condominium complex. Mr. Salazar said they have explained the proposal to the Hillcrest residents, who have no concerns. It was indicated property owners within 500 feet were notified of the variance request, as well as the recently approved conditional use for alcoholic beverage sales. No opposition has been expressed, Mr. Salazar clarified, while the Fire Marshal has indicated the building has a maximum occupancy of 150 persons, the applicants never intended the seating capacity to exceed 54 persons. Discussion ensued regarding hours of operation and signage on the property. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. 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, 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 one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C2. Discount Auto Parts, Inc. (Quick Lube Addition) for a setback variance of 10 ft to permit a proposed building 10 ft from the East side property line where a minimum setback of 20 ft is required at 2615 SR 590, Sec 08-29-16, M&B 22.04, zoned CH (Highway Commercial). V 97-11 Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicants wish to add a modestly sized oil change facility on an existing auto parts store property. He detailed setback and parking requirements. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with two standard conditions. In response to questions, it was indicated the Planning and Zoning Board approved a conditional use request for vehicle service on February 4, 1997. The subject property is located east of US 19, not to the west as indicated on the staff report. The application was correctly advertised. Kenneth Ehlers, representing the applicant, concurred with staff’s analysis of the proposal. In response to questions, Mr. Ehlers said Discount Auto Parts is adding oil change facilities to seven existing operations, and may add others, as feasible. He had no objections to the environmental official’s recommendation to preserve an existing ten-foot landscaping buffer along the east property line. No verbal or written support was expressed. One resident of the adjacent condominiums spoke in opposition, expressing concerns with compressor noise, site lighting, and the potential for petroleum contamination in runoff emanating from the subject property. As he resides in the unit closest to the business, he questioned whether anything can be done to reduce the existing impacts of light and noise. Mr. Ehlers responded the site lighting issue was addressed in the Planning and Zoning Board’s conditions of approval. Mr. Ehlers will look into correcting the existing lighting problem. Waste oil will be contained and removed from the site by contract. No oil will reach the pavement to be carried into the retention area. He was not aware of a noise issue, but will investigate enclosing compressors to baffle noise. Assistant City Attorney Dougall-Sides said the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to address lighting, noise, and similar site issues. While site lighting has been the subject of debate among board members, the noise issue was not addressed and no residents’ concerns has been expressed. She said a City noise code exists, and if violated, would subject the violator to a fine. The specific hours of operation were not known, but Mr. Ehlers assured the board business operations will not begin before 10:00 a.m. on Sunday mornings. 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, 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 one year from the date of this public hearing; 3) the 10-foot landscaping buffer along the east property line shall be preserved; and 4) operation of the facility shall not commence before 10:00 a.m. on Sunday mornings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.  C3. Stanislaw & Kazimiera Budzinski (Britt’s Cafe) for a setback variance of 12.5 ft to allow an awning/canopy 2.5 ft from the Gulfview Blvd right-of-way where a minimum setback of 15 ft is required at 201 Gulfview Blvd (Lloyd White Skinner Sub, Lots 48-52, and Lot 98, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial). V 97-12 Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant wishes to place an awning over a non-conforming wooden frame to protect an existing outdoor seating area from the weather. While the frame’s location in the setback area does not meet code, City policy allows it to remain because it was constructed pursuant to a City building permit. Due to the high visibility of the location, staff recommended the applicant to consider how to better coordinate the materials, colors, and form of the deck with the external appearance of the café and its surroundings. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with two standard conditions plus a condition directing consideration of aesthetic changes to blend the appearance of the café with its environment. In response to questions, Mr. Richter indicated some may feel the neon lights detract from the property’s appearance. Mr. Lior Hason, the business owner, submitted photographs and a swatch of his proposed awning material. He explained the work he has started in response to staff’s suggestions regarding the external appearance of the café. He submitted a petition with approximately 47 signatures from business people and customers in support of the application. In response to questions, Mr. Hason said the awning will be temporary/removable, and will be used only during inclement weather. He said he was using neon to spruce up the property, but could remove it if necessary. One member understood the need to market the business, but expressed an opinion the neon looks garish. Lengthy discussion ensued and strong concerns were expressed that a January 11, 1996 parking variance approval did not include a canopy over the outdoor seating area. It was indicated the documents and drawings submitted with the previous variance request had included a design for an uncovered deck, and deviation from those documents would nullify the previous decision. Two members felt the board had made it clear that the outdoor seating area was to remain uncovered and unenclosed, to be responsive to the City’s outdoor café approach. Concerns were expressed the amount of outdoor seating exceeds allowable limits. Mr. Richter responded to questions regarding seating area calculations and setback requirements in this district. One member suggested a continuance to research City records into how the City came to issue the permit in error. Mr. Richter briefly explained the City’s position on allowing the structure to remain because a permit had been issued, albeit by mistake. Responding to board concerns, Mr. Hason argued the previous plan had included a rough sketch showing the size and relative position of a deck, but was not intended as a specific design. He had understood that design details were supposed to have been worked out with staff subsequent to variance approval. He has cooperated with staff direction throughout his project and believes he had prior City authorization for each phase of construction. He stressed he did not built anything without prior City approval, because he cannot afford the risk. Despite the permit having been issued in error, board members felt their decisions should be upheld and the non-conforming structure should not be allowed. No verbal or written opposition was expressed. Mr. Hason’s 47-signature petition was submitted in support. In closing, Mr. Hason believed he has been responsive to board and City direction by landscaping, maintaining the property and keeping it very clean. He receives compliments on the appearance of the property. He expressed concern he may have to pay for a mistake that is not his fault. In response to a question, he reiterated he did not build anything on the property that was not inspected and approved by the City building department. Board members reiterated concerns with the enclosed appearance of the deck, and did not feel it was appropriate to increase the non-conformity. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the structure is legal. In response to a question, Mr. Richter reiterated again, the City has made the decision to accept the existing deck structure. The City views the variance application as an opportunity to improve what is existing, by making it blend with its surrounding environment. One member agreed a roll-up awning is a relatively minor approach to improving the appearance. It was suggested to delay a decision, and request input from the Design Review Board once design guidelines are adopted for Clearwater beach. Ms. Dougall-Sides indicated it may be several months before those guidelines are adopted by the City Commission. One member requested staff to investigate reinstatement of the code provision that a mistake having been made is not grounds for variance approval. It was feared granting a setback to allow a structure 2.5 feet from the right-of-way in a key location would set a dangerous precedent for future beach development. It was indicated denial of today’s request would not change the existing structure, but would forestall any additional enclosure. While some felt an outdoor seating area should remain open uncovered and unenclosed, one felt the board should rely on staff’s recommendation as a means of improving an eyesore. Member Johnson moved to deny the variance(s) 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. Members Gans, Johnson, Schwob, and Jonnatti voted "Aye"; Member Stuart voted "Nay." Motion carried. C4. Demetre Loulourgas (American Tool and Mold) for (1) an open space variance for the lot of 2.6 percent to allow 12.4 percent where a minimum of 15 percent is required; (2) a parking variance of 100 parking spaces to allow 159 parking spaces where 259 spaces are required at 1180 N Hercules Ave, Marymont Sub., part of Tract A and B, zoned IL (Limited Industrial). V 97-13 Mr. Richter presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the American Tool and Mold business needs more space and the applicant wishes to expand onto a currently unincorporated parcel. Annexation of the parcel is attractive to the City, to expand the tax base, and provide additional employment opportunities. Mr. Richter outlined the landscaping provision, open space and parking requirements, stating the variances are minor. The applicant has indicated approximately 180 parking spaces will be needed at peak shift, and 244 will be provided. Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval with five standard conditions, which he related to the board. A question was raised whether a new building would have any negative impact on the use or operation of the Clearwater Airpark. While the details were not known, it was indicated the airpark organization was aware of the proposal and had no significant concerns. Gerry Figurski, attorney representing the applicant, concurred with staff’s summary of the application. He briefly highlighted the developer’s agreement and details associated with the annexation request. He said Assistant City Manager Bob Keller has met with airpark interests to explain the proposal to use an adjacent portion of City land for a dry retention pond. To relieve some airpark concerns, the pond was reconfigured to have less surface area, and the applicant has agreed to improve with landscaping an airpark gas valve system and entrance roadway along the airpark’s northern boundary. He explained the plastic injection molding business and conditions on surrounding properties. In response to questions, Mr. Figurski explained which existing buildings are to be demolished, and said the new building will be one story, less than 30 feet high. He responded to questions regarding location and ownership of the onsite and offsite parking spaces, and probable timing for the two phases of the project. Demetre Loulourgas, the owner/applicant, responded to questions regarding use of existing buildings, his proposal for the new building, and how he operates his business. He said he purchased the property for his business four years ago because he enjoys Clearwater and wishes to remain. He explained the number of people working on each shift, stating he did not feel the remote parking spaces he is providing will be needed. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. 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, 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 one year from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Minutes Approval -- January 23, 1997 Member Johnson moved to approve the minutes as submitted in writing to each member by the Board Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Board and Staff Comments 1. Presentation -- Landscaping in street rights-of-way -- Mike Quillen and Allen Mayberry, City Environmental Management Division Mr. Quillen addressed the board regarding the recently completed City tree inventory and explained the City’s policy discouraging shrubbery and tree planting in City rights-of-way. He noted the board receives frequent requests to reduce landscaping buffer widths, and to build fences in and near City rights-of-way. Mr. Mayberry provided additional details of the street tree inventory, and the difficulties associated with planting or building in City rights-of-way. Discussion ensued regarding circumstances in which the City might review individual requests for tree planting or landscaping beautification in rights-of-way. General discussion ensued regarding shade, accent, and palm trees. Board members thanked environmental staff for the presentation, and for their recommendations regarding variance requests. Mr. Richter praised Mr. Quillen and Mr. Mayberry for their conscientous, principled, and reasonable approach to their work, stating it is a pleasure to work with them. Mr. Richter followed up on discussions from previous meetings. He stated Engineering staff has determined there is no opportunity to widen 12-foot wide Harris Lane (DCAB 1/23/97; VR 9705; McCrae); Mr. Shuford has rescheduled review of the Land Development Code revisions to March 13, 1997; and the two fences on Fredrica Avenue have been issued permits (DCAB 1/9/97; VR 9668 and VR 9675.) Mr. Richter requested board suggestions on how staff can ensure appropriate permits are issued. Mr. Gans reiterated his request for staff to investigate reinstatement of the code provision that a permit having been issued in error is not grounds for variance approval. Discussion ensued regarding controversial structures on Clearwater beach, and follow-up landscaping inspection for a commercial property along Court Street. Mr. Richter said these issues can be discussed with Mr. Shuford during the Land Development Code revision discussion. Brief discussion ensued regarding the proposed Mandalay Avenue Streetscape. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:28 p.m.