05/20/1992 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE A HEARING OFFICER
May 20, 1992
Harold S. Wilson vs. City of Clearwater
Hearing Officer: James E. Bradwell
Also Present: M. A. Galbraith, Jr., Esquire, City Attorney
Sandra Glathorn, Senior Planner
Camille Motley, Central Records Specialist
Issue: Harold S. Wilson, trustee (ExotiCar) to permit (1) outdoor retail sales, displays, and/or storage; and (2) wholesaling/distributing as 18514 U.S. 19N, Sec-19-29-16, M&B 44.04,
44.041, zoned CH (highway commercial).
CU 92-11.
Appearances: Harold S. Wilson, Trustee (Exoticar)
Leonard McCue, Owner of adjacent property
Exhibits Submitted: 1. Notice of Appeal dated February 6, 1992, signed by Harold S. Wilson
2. Notice of Public Hearing of February 4, 1992.
3. Excerpt of draft minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board of February 4, 1992.
4. Conditional Use Application.
5. Conditional Use Transmittal.
6. Conditional Use Request map.
7. Planning and Development staff's recommendation.
8. Letter of objection dated February 3, 1992, from the Board of Governors of LeCher Professional Center.
9. Internal Planning Department memo re: objection of Frank Kunnen.
10. Letter from City Attorney, dated February 12, 1992, transmitting items 1
through 9.
11. Cassette tape sent by petitioner to hearing officer prior to hearing.
Opening statements were taken by James E. Bradwell.
Mr. Galbraith introduced Sandra Glathorn, Senior Planner, whom he indicated would represent the city's Planning and Zoning Board and was prepared to discuss parking space requirements
and availability and sign code problems.
Additional exhibits were accepted by the hearing officer.
A. Excerpt from the Land Development Code setting forth the permitted uses and conditional uses within a highway commercial district.
B. Excerpt from the city's Land Development Code concerning use standards.
C. Excerpt 137.011 from city's Land Development Code.
D. Aerial map produced by Pinellas County in March 1990 which shows the location of the building and general area.
E. Aerial map of SE corner of US 19 and Nursery Road showing subject building.
F. Aerial map authorized by City.
G. A site plan approved by the City, prepared or directed by Frank Hunter, which showed the parking spaces.
H. Photos of present location of Exoticar.
I. Photos of previous place of business of Exoticar.
J. Aerial map dated April, 1987.
K. Composite of statements from building tenants and Exoticar employees which denied allegations set forth in letter of objection dated February 3, 1992, from the Board of Governors
of LeCher
Professional Center.
Other exhibits accepted during the hearing by the hearing officer:
1. Mr. Schuford's memorandum with conditions attached.
Public 1. Letter dated May 14, 1992
Mr.Wilson gave a detailed history of the property. He submitted excerpt from the Land Development Code that set forth the permitted uses and conditional uses within a highway commercial
district and stated that wholesale distributing and outdoor retail sales, displays and/or storage are among conditional uses. He stated that Style Auto had been conducting business
(wholesaling luxury automobiles) from this premises for 3 years and Exoticar had been conducting business (wholesaling luxury cars and, on occasion, retails vehicles) from an adjacent
building for one year. When Exoticar moved to this facility, an enforcement officer notified them that a conditional use was required to continue to do business. Exoticar made application
for conditional wholesale/distributing use and outdoor resales use.
During further discussion, Mr. Wilson denied the nuisance clause and explained how Exoticar complied with each conditional use but admitted Exoticar needed to come into compliance with
the signage set forth in 137.011.
Mr. Leonard McCue, owner of adjacent property, gave testimony regarding his knowledge of Exoticar; present appearance of property; and described the surrounding businesses. He stated
that he had no objection to the request.
Mr. James Ray, owner of Exoticar, explained the nature of Exoticar's business as being primarily wholesalers that purchases high-priced or luxury cars. He stated that Exoticar operated
more like a corporate headquarters.
Mr. Ray also commented on the photos which had been submitted as Exhibits and denied that any of the cars or signs shown in the photos were from Exoticar. He stated he had no objection
to not having a for sale sign but would like to have a sign showing what the year of a car was.
Mr. Galbraith offered a new list of conditions which were accepted by Mr. Ray with the exception of item 4, which pertained to signs.
Mr. Galbraith indicated that the sign code was not in question at this hearing.
Mr. Ray agreed to limit the number of cars to five (5) cars (for sale or delivery) on the property at any one time. This would not include the cars belonging to Exoticar's employees
and customers.
Mr. Ray also agreed to have transporters load and unload elsewhere.
Mr. Wilson concluded the appellants case.
Mr. Galbraith called Ms. Glatthorn who explained the procedures carried out by the Planning staff in evaluating this application for conditional use. Staff determined that six (6) spaces
for outdoor auto sales was required. If the office space was accessory to this business, there would be no additional requirement.
Mr. Galbraith entered city's Exhibit 1, the list of conditions that were attached to Mr. Schuford's memorandum.
Ms. Glatthorn explained the site plan was not a certified site plan and was not required to go through a formal site plan review process. Ms. Glatthorn stated the current parking regulations
were adopted in October of 1985.
Mr. Kunnen, the builder of the building, explained that all parking was not shared by all tenants in complex; each business had a particular number of spaces. In the past, an informal
agreement had been in existence which allowed customers to park wherever they could find a space. He submitted a letter dated May 14th, Public Exhibit 1.
Mr. Kunnen responded to questioning by Mr. Wilson about the history of the property and the agreement entered into on June, 1987 as to the use and maintenance of other business in the
complex at that time.
Mr. Wilson objected to all hearsay evidence being discussed.
Mr. Edward Smith, a tenant of the property, gave testimony and offered a photo of the property into evidence which was accepted by the hearing officer in rebuttal of previous testimony
as Public Exhibit 2.
Mr. Wilson objected to the testimony being given.
Mr. Wilson continued to question Mr. Smith about photos previously accepted as evidence and the previous tenant of the property.
Mr. Lou Howell, owner of building number two as of January 29, 1992, gave testimony concerning the parking requirements and how the rental of his property is affected.
Andrew Salzman, an attorney representing LeCher Professional Center offered testimony about the problems concerning mutually
shared ingress and egress of the site; the noise generated by retail sales; allotted parking areas; and use compatibility as compared to surrounding uses.
Mr. Salzman also spoke about the maintenance agreement and uniformity of appearance that was signed in 1987 stating it referred to not only outside but the inside as well.
Closing remarks were made.
Hearing adjourned at 4:03 p.m.
(Note: Hearing Officer overturned P&Z denial and granted Petitioner's conditional use application with conditions)