Loading...
12/01/1993 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE A HEARING OFFICER December 1, 1993 - 9:00 a.m. Eugene R. Smith, d/b/a BCR Development Hearing Officer: K. N. Ayers Also Present: Miles A. Lance, Assistant City Attorney Lou Hilton, Planner II Camille Motley, Central Records Specialist Issue: Variance of 13.24 ft. to allow a structure 12.00 ft. from side property line where 25.24 ft. is required at 301 - 307 Island Way, Island Estates of Clearwater, Unit 2, Lot 10 and part of Lot 11, zoned RM 20 (Multiple-Family Residential) V-93-45. Appearances: Gregory Fox, Esquire Dave Ramsey, Professional Engineer 434 Skinner Boulevard, Dunedin, FL 34698 Fred Staples, President Dearborn Towers Tenants Association 223 Island Way, Clearwater, FL 34630 Fred Backham, Director Island Estates Civic Association 321 Palm Island South, Clearwater, FL 34630 Exhibits Submitted: 1. Letter, dated November 30, 1993, from Dearborn Towers Tenants Association regarding variance request from E. R. Smith, III 2. Site Plan of Pelican Port and part of the Dearborn Towers property adjacent to the south. 3. Certified Site Plan for Pelican Port (PSP 93-06). 4. Permit Application signed by David F. Ramsey dated 10/20/93, for proposed townhouse. 5. Calculations showing amount left for building space with a 20% setback. Exhibits were accepted by the hearing officer. Hearing Officer K. N. Ayers called the hearing to order at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Fox stated initially the Petitioner had asked for two (2) variances. The first variances was for 25.12 feet to allow construction on a lot of only 124.88 feet wide. This variance had been granted for the nonconforming lot. The other variance which affected the sides of the property was denied. Mr. Fox proceeded to give the various measurements for the open area. He felt he has met the standards and called for a variance on side of the property having the largest open space. Denial of the variance has placed substantial hardship on the Petitioner. Mr. Lance explained the position of the Development Code Adjustment Board (DCAB) regarding the granted variance (V-7-93) which had been granted on July 22, 1993 for 25.12 feet to allow a minimum lot width of 124.88 feet where 150 feet is required. He stated the second variance of 13.24 feet to construct a building 12 feet from the side property line where 25.25 feet is required was continued until September 9, 1993 and then denied. The DCAB Board felt there were no conditions unique to the property; there was no necessary hardship shown other than financial hardship was placed on the Petitioner and any hardship was caused by the applicant; the request for variance was not a minimum request necessary to make a use reasonable use for the property; granting the variance would detract from the appearance and substantially diminish and impair the value of the surrounding property. Mr. Lance stated that the application for a variance is really based on an economic desire. Mr. Fox called David F. Ramsey to give testimony referencing the site plans submitted. He stated the zoning would be maintained and not encroach on the open sides of the property. Hearing Officer Ayers asked for restatement and clarification of the setback requirements. The ordinance provides for both a specified number of feet as well as a percentage. 20% of the frontage must be open on one side and 20% on both sides based upon the code. Waterfront yard requirement is 20% of the width of the property. Mr. Lance asked Mr. Ramsey if he had testified he wanted 10 units to make the project economically feasible on September 9, 1993 before the DCAB . Mr. Ramsey stated he had said "more economically feasible". He agreed he had stated that he would accept 9 units if a variance was granted. Hearing Officer Ayers accepted exhibit 2 (a flat plat called Pelican Port), exhibit 3 (a certified site plan of Pelican Port) and exhibit 4 (a building permit application). Mr. Fox entered a document (exhibit 5) which contained calculations of 20% taken from the proposed footage to show the resulting amount left for building space. Mr. Lou Hilton was asked to give testimony. He responded to Mr. Fox he was familiar with the case but did not write a staff report on the project. He felt it appeared to be a reasonable request based on the initial width of property. It seemed to be the minimum variance needed. He indicated that nine (9) units would be the allowable maximum. Mr. Lance then questioned Mr. Hilton. Mr. Hilton stated he felt the width of the property was incidental to the request for the second variance. The width of the property lended itself to the second variance request. The width of the property was non-conforming when requested by the first variance. Mr. Lance stated a side setback restriction is the present issue. Mr. Hilton agreed that this was a different issue and he had told the Petitioner to apply for the variances although staff recommendation is not necessarily followed by DCAB. Mr. Fox asked Mr. Hilton if a variance was needed to make the property sellable to which he agreed. Mr. Hilton stated the applicant appeared to meet all the other requirements, the open space which is 20% of the width of the property, an addition to front setbacks and rear setbacks and height and so on. Mr. Hilton stated the Petitioner had met all the other requirements with the exception of the side setback issue. Mr. Lance asked if it wasn't possible to develop this 126 foot lot without a variance. Mr. Hilton responded a variance would be needed because the lot was non-conforming. It does not meet the minimum width standard as asked for in the code. Mr. Ramsey was recalled and gave testimony that the size of the units were reduced in order to make the property fit within the requirement. Mr Fred Backham, representing Island Estates Civic Association, testified the Association was very much opposed to the granting of this variance. The association members would loose the water view and this development would cause a cramped appearance of the area. The association felt it would hurt their property values. Mr. Fox questioned Mr. Backham about his testimony in regard to the loss of water view. Mr. Backham stated part of the present view is through the pool area of Dearborn Towers. If Dearborn Towers erects a building in the future, the entire view would be lost. Mr. Fred Staples, representing Dearborn Towers Tenants Association was called to give testimony. He express the association was against the granting of the variance. The recreation area is important to the members of the association and they want to use it in full. Mr. Fox questioned Mr. Staples regarding his testimony and Mr. Staples stated the property owner ought to have the right to continue to use the property as it was originally developed without infringement of a restriction from a side property. Hearing Officer Ayers stated he had heard all the evidence. He advised Mr. Fox he had the right to submit a proposed recommended order to him within 10 days. Mr. Fox made a closing statement during which he restated his clients case. Mr. Lance made a closing statement in which he restated the DCAB position for denial of side setback variance and reminded the Hearing Officer that the City Code or Ordinances prohibits variances to be granted for financial reasons of hardship. The hearing was adjourned by Hearing Officer Ayers at 10:00 a.m. (note: Hearing Officer upheld DCAB's denial of variance)