Loading...
08/16/1988 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1988 - 1:30 PM Members Present: Chairman Johnson, Ms. Nixon, Messrs. Ferrell, Green (arrived at 1:35 PM), Hamilton, Hogan, and Schwob Also present: Leo Schrader, Assistant City Attorney A. Motion was made by Mr. Hogan, seconded by Mr. Schwob, to continue approval of the minutes of the July 26, 1988 meeting. Motion carried unanimously (6 to 0). Chairman Johnson outlined the procedures for conditional uses and advised that anyone adversely affected by a decision of the Planning and Zoning Board, with regard to conditional uses, has two weeks from this date in which to file an appeal through the City Clerk's Office. Florida Law requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal. B. Conditional Uses: 1. (REQUEST FOR EXTENSION) Lots 4 through 11 Columbia Sub. #5 (445 Hamden Drive) Sea Stone, Ltd. CU 88-15 Request - Marina (Construction of Additional Pier) Zoned - CR-28 (Resort Commercial "Twenty-Eight") AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for extension of a previously approved conditional use for a marina in the Aquatic Lands/Coastal zoning district adjacent to upland property zoned Resort Commercial "Twenty-Eight"; the Board did previously approve the request on February 16, 1988; if the Board grants the extension the same conditions that applied when the use was granted should continue in effect; and, applicant did express concern at the previous hearing regarding the 6 month time limit and he was advised the proper procedure to follow. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the request for extension subject to the following: 1) That the Building Permit be procured within six months; 2) That there be no permanent slips on the pier; 3) That the approval of the conditional use for a pier constitutes no revision to previous approval or conditions to previous approval of conditional use for a 16-slip marina approved October 14, 1986; and 4) That the pier be no more than 100 feet in length from the shoreline. Mr. Don L. Seaton, applicant, stated the request for extension is necessary because he is still working with D.E.R. He advised he is unsure what will actually be built and he cannot pull permits until the design is completed. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Green, seconded by Mr. Schwob, to approve the request for extension subject to the following: 1) That the Building Permit be procured within six months; 2) That there be no permanent slips on the pier; 3) That the approval of the conditional use for a pier constitutes no revision to previous approval or conditions to previous approval of conditional use for a 16-slip marina approved October 14, 1986; and 4) That the pier be no more than 100 feet in length from the shoreline. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 2. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88) Lots 5, 7 and 8 Countryside Village Square (2549 Countryside Boulevard, Suite 2) Countryside Village Ltd./Naughty's, Inc./Patricia Muscarella CU 88-58 Request - 4-COP-SRX (On Premise Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages) Zoned - CC (Commercial Center) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for on premise consumption of alcoholic beverages in the Commercial Center zoning district; the specific request is for an existing establishment to change license designation from a 2-COP license to a 4-COP-SRX license, which requires 51% food sales; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.024 and 136.025(b); the Traffic Engineer had no objection; the Police Department saw no reason to deny license to applicant; and no variance to the separation distance would be required. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval subject to the following: 1) That the new alcoholic beverage license be procured within 6 months. Ms. Trish Muscarella, representative of applicant, stated applicant wanted to upgrade the decor to more of a restaurant. She stated the establishment is set up like a pub and the applicant will be expanding from 2,000 square feet to 2,800 square feet. After questioning by Board members, Ms. Muscarella advised as follows: There will be no live entertainment; there will be no outdoor speakers; the establishment will have an old time type decor; and, applicant is currently at 55% food sales and doesn't anticipate any problems maintaining that percentage. Ms. Harvey advised two letters of opposition were received from area residents. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Mr. Schwob felt the letters of opposition appear to refer to problems associated with bars not a restaurant. Ms. Nixon suggested approval contain a condition requiring the kitchen to remain open until one hour before closing. Mr. Ferrell suggested approval contain a condition requiring no outdoor speakers. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Ms. Nixon, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the new alcoholic beverages license be obtained within 6 months; 2) That the kitchen remain open until at least one hour before closing; and, 3) That there be no outdoor speakers. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 3. Lots 72 to 74, Part Lot 75 Floyd-White Skinner Sub. (411 South Gulfview Boulevard) Americana Gulf Motels, Ltd./ Steven Watts CU 88-63 Request - Business/Professional Office (Residential Real Estate Office) Zoned - CR-28 (Resort Commercial "Twenty-Eight") Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for a business/professional office, specifically an office which serves the tourist, in the Resort Commercial "Twenty-Eight" zoning district; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.025(b) and (c)(5); applicant requests to use part of an existing duplex as a real estate office; the Traffic Engineer had no objection; and a parking variance is required which is scheduled to be heard before the Development Code Adjustment Board. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval subject to the following: 1) That a parking variance be granted by the Development Code Adjustment Board; and, 2) That the Occupational License be procured within 6 months. Atty. Steven Watts, representative of applicant, submitted a document listing applicant's compliance with the Code. Mr. Watts advised as follows: Applicant deals in real estate typically with the tourist trade; applicant has begun improvements on the building; applicant will cater mostly to walk in traffic; there will be regular business hours and no loud noise; the parking variance is for one parking space; and he felt the use was compatible with surrounding uses. Mr. Watts added that a lease has been secured for additional parking one block away. He felt there would be no problem getting the parking variance. In opposition to the above request, the above person appeared to give his comment: Mr. Ken Rosenow, adjacent property owner, stated he is not in opposition but stated he has some questions. After questioning by Mr. Rosenow, Ms. Harvey added the use is at the subject property by conditional use approval and the only operation that could replace the present operation is another real estate office. She added that if anything else would be proposed for the property that request would be required to come before this Board, which request would be a public hearing and Mr. Rosenow would receive notice. Ms. Harvey advised that permitted uses are allowed on the subject property. After further questioning by Mr. Rosenow, Ms. Harvey advised he would have the same recourse as he has now, that being as a private property owner he could have vehicles that are parked on his property removed. Mr. Rosenow stated he has no direct opposition to the business itself. Motion was made by Mr. Hogan, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That a parking variance be granted by the Development Code Adjustment Board; and, 2) That the Occupational License be procured within 6 months. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 4. Part Lot 10, A.H. Duncun's Resub. (1453 South Greenwood Avenue) William J. Hunter & Jack Bocook/ Todd Pressman CU 88-64 Request - Outdoor Retail Sales, Displays and/or Storage Zoned - CG (General Commercial) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for outdoor retail sales, displays and/or storage in the General Commercial zoning district; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.025(b) and (c)(22); it is staff's understanding applicant is proposing to use a structure not entirely enclosed for selling plants; and, the Traffic Engineer had no objection is adequate parking is provided. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the above request subject to the following: 1) That a parking plan be approved by the Traffic Engineer; and, 2) That the Occupational License be procured within 6 months. Mr. Todd Pressman, representative of applicant, stated the subject location contains approximately 600 to 640 square feet and is intended to serve as a holding area and retail sales. He stated the area will mostly be used for potting and cleaning up of plants but will specifically protect the plants from the sun. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Pressman stated he spoke with the Traffic Engineer and he got permission for the layout of the property but he anticipates no problems having a parking plan approved by the Traffic Engineer. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That a parking plan be approved by the Traffic Engineer; and, 2) That the Occupational License be procured within 6 months. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 5. Lots 1 through 10, Blk. C, Bayside Shores (735 Bayway Boulevard) Donna M. Kebort (Dock of the Bay, Inc.)/ Adriano Battaglini CU 88-65 Request - 4-COP-SRX (On Premise Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages) (Change of Conditions) Zoned - CB (Beach Commercial) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for reconsideration of a condition of a use approved by the Planning & Zoning Board on November 18, 1986, which condition required a 12:00 midnight closing; the applicant is operating a restaurant and lounge with a 4-COP-SRX license and the application was reviewed previously under the Code requirements where the Board was required to use the "sufficient distance" rule in regard to churches, schools, and residences; and, the Code has since changed and in terms of separation distance this application with a 4-COP-SRX license would not require additional approval by the City Commission in regard to separation distance. Ms. Harvey advised the issue before the Board is not whether the establishment is too close to residences or whether the establishment should or should not sell alcoholic beverages, since these are existing conditions regardless of this Board's decision today regarding closing time. She stated the applicant is requesting that the Board allow him to keep his doors open until 2:00 AM. Ms. Harvey advised the Traffic Engineer had no comments. She also advised the Police Department commented it still has no reason to recommend denial of the license, which comments included a list of police activities at the subject establishment. She stated that there has been a substantial reduction of the number of calls at the property. Ms. Harvey stated the applicant appealed the Board's previous decision when it placed the midnight closing condition on its approval of the use and the Board's decision was affirmed. She stated that it was the City Commission's intention to continue to allow this Board the opportunity to place conditions on approval of change of business ownership where it thought there was a need to place conditions such as restricting hours of operation in order to avert possible problems. Ms. Harvey advised there has been no evidence presented at this point in time that would cause the City to believe that there has been a change in the conditions from the last time this Board reviewed this request or from the time the hearing officer reviewed the request on appeal. Ms. Harvey stated that, for this reason, staff recommended the conditions remain intact. Ms. Harvey advised there has been a lot of correspondence submitted from property owners in opposition to the above request and one letter of opposition submitted at this hearing (see attached). Ms. Trish Muscarella, representative of applicant, stated Adriano Battaglini is the current owner. She stated Mr. Battaglini's operation has been placed at a disadvantage compared to other operations on the beach. She stated applicant has been asked to pay for the sins of the past owner. She also stated applicant is a civic minded person. Ms. Muscarella stated applicant is requesting approval of hours of operation to be in conformance with operations on the beach. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Ms. Muscarella stated Donna Kebort is the property owner, Mr. Battaglini leases space in the shopping center, and the current name of the operation is Dock of the Bay. After further questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Adriano Battaglini, applicant, clarified the name of the operation is Dock of the Bay, Inc. which formerly did business as Mama Nina's and is now doing business as Dock of the Bay. After questioning by Mr. Hogan, Ms. Muscarella stated that, if shareholders in the corporation change, the Code requires the change to come before this Board for approval. She advised that Mr. Battaglini is the owner of Dock of the Bay Corporation. The following persons appeared in support of the above request to give their comments: Mr. Noel Woods, 640 South Bayway, felt it was unreasonable to not allow restaurant to serve food or alcoholic beverages until 2:00 AM. He stated others on Clearwater Beach can serve until 2:00 AM. He stated he picks up trash from other operations on his property. He felt not allowing the applicant to remain open until 2:00 AM is unfair and discriminatory. After questioning by Ms. Nixon, Ms. Muscarella submitted a petition in support of the above request containing over 600 signatures of people who have been in the above establishment (see attached). After further questioning by Ms. Nixon, Ms. Muscarella stated the people who signed the petition are not all residents from Clearwater Beach. Mr. William Skipper, 692 Bayway, stated he is speaking for 3 motels that are within the vicinity of Dock of the Bay. He stated that vacationers staying at his hotel like the establishment, the food, the convenience, and the beverages, but they do not like the 12:00 midnight closing. He added the vacationers will sometimes come back to the hotel at midnight, get in their cars, and go somewhere else where they can be served. He felt it was unfair to not to be able to make a living on Clearwater Beach. He stated he is within hearing distance of the establishment. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Skipper stated he had not lived on Clearwater Beach when there were previously problems with noise and he had not signed petitions in support or opposition. After further questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Skipper stated he is about 1 1/2 minutes walking distance from the establishment. Mr. Fred Baker, 850 Bayway, stated he felt it was unfair that applicant cannot be open until 2:00 AM. He stated the food is good and the service is good. He stated he is about a 2 minute walk from the establishment. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, he stated he did not live on Clearwater Beach during previous hearings and he did not sign petitions. Mr. Lonny Lamb, 724 Bayway, across the street from subject establishment, felt the applicant should be permitted to stay open. He felt the noise is not a problem and the police station has been a stabilizing force. He stated applicant is a very hard-working individual. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Lamb stated he did not testify previously. He added that when he first moved to his residence he was asked to join a group of people in opposition to the establishment. Mr. Lamb stated he hears more noise from the re-routing of traffic that has recently taken place on Clearwater Beach. Ms. Kathleen Lamb, 724 Bayway, stated that in May her bowling league had a banquet at the subject establishment and the league was told they had to leave at 11:30 PM. She added all the bowlers are local residents ranging in age from 24 to 70. She felt the restriction was unfair for this establishment. Mr. Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive, stated he represents himself and the manager of the Hilton Hotel. He stated he is totally in support of a 2:00 AM closing for the establishment. Mr. Don Seaton, 520 Belle Isle Avenue, Belleair Beach, part owner of Sea Wake Inn, 691 Gulfview, stated he did not sign for or against any previous hearing regarding the subject establishment. He stated the Sea Wake did not have a problem previously. He felt it was unfair the establishment had to close early. He stated the Sea Wake is permitted to stay open but the Sea Wake does not serve food after 10:00 PM by choice. He stated that he has found, through experience, that a variety of restaurants and variety of hours is a benefit. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Seaton stated it is his opinion it is the new operator of the of the business that has caused the complete turn around in the operation. Ms. Lila Siouffi, 1814-K Sunset Point Road, stated the problems have been eliminated. Mr. Fred Deloagott, General Manager, Holiday Inn-Gulfview, stated he is in favor of allowing the establishment to remain open to benefit the tourist and the employees on Clearwater Beach. Mr. Saylor, Holiday Inn-Surfside, stated the new owner should have the right to conduct business the same as others on Clearwater Beach. Mr. David Miller, 550 U. S. Hwy 19 South, Palm Harbor, stated he is a staff writer for a local magazine. He felt if the establishment were allowed to remain open until 2:00 PM, the customers would leave during varying times rather than everyone leave at midnight. He stated, though there have been problems previously, there are not problems now. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Miller stated the establishment attracts both locals and tourists and range from 21 years of age to the late 60s. Mr. William Tender, 125 Windward Island, stated the establishment is nice and clean and does not have a bad clientele. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Tender stated he is a patron of the establishment. Mr. Alfred Stanford, 607 Bay Esplanade, stated he has seen both owners and he has seen all the problems. He stated the issue is not whether someone likes the establishment but whether someone has the right to operate regardless of a previous owner. He felt the police station across the street has an effect on all businesses in the area. He stated the new routing of traffic does cause noise. Mr. Stanford stated applicant is trying to make a living when he knew nothing of the previous problems and that applicant wants to operate a restaurant. He felt that the Board's decision should not be made on what happened in 1986 or 1987 but what happened in 1988. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Stanford stated he spoke in front of the Commission and this Board when the establishment was operated by the previous owner. He stated he spoke in favor of the establishment. Mr. Stanford stated he understands restrictions if they are necessary. He also stated Mr. Battaglini is required to sell a certain percentage of food to retain his 4-COP-SRX license. Mr. Robert Connington, 666 Mandalay, stated he works part time at the subject establishment and full time at another establishment and there is more noise at his full time job than at his part time at the subject establishment. Mr. William G. Rip, 640 South Bayway, Unit 301, stated he is retired and has been in the area for 4 months. He stated he was in the restaurant business for 25 years. He stated he is in support of the above request. In opposition to the above request, the following persons appeared to give their comments: Mr. Paul Scholz, 800 South Gulfview, stated he attended the hearings before this Board and before the hearing officer. He stated the noise has stopped and he felt it has stopped because of the 12:00 midnight closing. He felt that even though the police station was across the street, the noise ordinance was declared unconstitutional and nothing can be done about noise. He felt if the longer hours are allowed at the subject establishment that the same problems would occur. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Scholz stated there is some noise from the traffic but it is earlier than 2:00 AM. Mr. James Motter, 800 South Gulfview, stated that about 3 weeks ago, he heard loud and abusive language from the parking lot of the establishment at 10:00 PM. He felt the hours should remain the same. In rebuttal, Ms. Muscarella stated Mr. Battaglini wanted to clean up a serious problem and she felt he should not be punished for trying to do so. She stated he has done a good job and many neighbors who live very close to the establishment are in support of Mr. Battaglini's request. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Ms. Muscarella stated the percentage of food sales is currently at about 54%. Mr. Hogan stated it appeared applicant has cleaned up the establishment and hoped it stayed that way. He expressed concern that the establishment may revert to the former operation. Ms. Nixon felt the petition was not meaningful because it did not come from residents or neighbors but from people living elsewhere. She stated that some of the people who spoke in support did not previously live in the area. She stated one of the reasons there is not a problem with some of the hotels being open late is because the restaurants are within other buildings. She felt the problems have been eliminated. She expressed concern that Dock of the Bay is back and she expressed concern if food sales cannot be maintained. Mr. Hamilton stated the problem has been eliminated. He also stated noise can be heard anywhere on Clearwater Beach. Mr. Hamilton advised he has been in the establishment and it is a very good restaurant with quality food. He felt the operation is very well run and Mr. Battaglini has always been present. Mr. Hamilton felt the applicant is entitled to this change and he stated there weren't many restaurants on south Clearwater Beach that were open at a later hour and that served quality food. Mr. Hamilton stated if the operation changes business ownership the new owner will be required to come before this Board. Mr. Ferrell stated he thought everyone present today would be in opposition to the request. He stated that had there been continual problems at the establishment, those in opposition would have shown up. He added that the disturbance that was referred to by the opposition could have happened at 10:00 PM or 2:00 AM and loud tires is a police matter and the management should not be held responsible. He felt that one suitable condition might be that the kitchen remain open until within at least 1 hour of closing. Mr. Schwob stated that the decisions made previously were based on information received. He also stated it appears the situation has changed, police presence is greater, there is a different traffic system on Clearwater Beach, and the owner runs a good restaurant. Mr. Schwob suggested the possibility of approving the use for a period of one year, with the applicant coming before this Board for a rehearing. He added that, at that time, if there are problems the people can come before this Board to speak and will then be protected. Mr. Green stated he still has some concerns but would be in favor of the request if the use is approved for a period of one year and applicant is required to come before this Board another time. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approve the request for extension of hours to allow a 2:00 AM closing subject to the following: 1) That the kitchen remain open to within at least one hour of closing; and 2) That the approval is granted for a period of one year and applicant must come before this Board in August, 1989. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 6. M&B 44.25, Sec. 21-29S-15E (1550 & 1552 South Myrtle Avenue) John R. Espey/R. Carlton Ward CU 88-66 Request - Level III Group Care Zoned - RM-8 (Multiple Family "Eight") ["OL" Limited Office zoning approved by the City Commission on 8/4/88] Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for a Level III Group Care Facility, specifically housing for the homeless, in a proposed Limited Office zoning district currently zoned Multiple Family Residential "Eight"; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.025(b) and (c)(16); the Traffic Engineer had no comment; and, Chief Sid Klein of the Police Department testified previously he is in support of the above request. She advised this application is presented under the Level III Group Care because the Code currently provides no other classification for this use. She also advised that as a result of this Board's previous recommendation, staff has provided a proposal to the City Commission which will come to this Board in the near future for an amendment to the Code to provide for this type of facility in Clearwater regarding density and floor area. Ms. Harvey stated a copy of a Resolution by the Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce was received that supported the location. Ms. Harvey advised this specific application is for property located on South Myrtle and the applicant has provided a schematic survey of what the intentions are. She advised there are currently 3 structures on the site and one is to be removed and one is to be built. She also advised that provided with the application is the concept of the program. She further advised that at such time the Land Development Code is amended this Board can expect to see an application to rezone this property to a category that would not set a precedence for further rezonings in this area. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the above request subject to the following: 1) That the Building Permit be procured within months; and 2) That the proposed OL "Limited Office" zoning be finalized. After questioning by Mr. Johnson, Ms. Harvey advised the property is just short of being one acre and the City Commission can rezone property that is less than 2 acres when it feels it is in the best interest of the public to do so. Atty. Carlton Ward, representative of the property owner and Isaiah's Inn, stated a rezoning and Land Use Plan amendment have been approved by this Board and the City Commission. He felt all the requirements have been met and it is applicant's intention to operate a much needed project. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Ward advised there will be no significant changes in the project as previously submitted. He also advised Isaiah's Inn would have no objection to the property being rezoned at such a time as the Land Development Code would be amended. Mr. Bob Crown, Director of Isaiah's Inn, stated the current facility will house 15 to 20 men. He added there is a smaller building on the rear of the property that can be used as a short-term emergency shelter for a family, but it is not intended to have families at the facility on a regular on-going basis. After questioning by Mr. Hogan, stated the original plan had a dormitory that would house well over 20 men but the space at the subject facility will not handle that many people. After further questioning by Mr. Hogan, Mr. Crown stated one of the local downtown churches has offered day care facilities and another church has offered its services as a backup for day care facilities. He stated medical facilities are a problem but there is a mobile medical unit that might be able to be used. In opposition to the above request, the following person appeared to give her comments: Mrs. Lois Cormier, request the subject item be continued until the final reading of the ordinance takes place to rezone the property to Limited Office. She stated she felt the item should be continued to await clarification of the use of property within 200 feet of the subject property. She advised that the property located at 1569 South Ft. Harrison known as the Fairwinds received approval of a conditional use for Adult Congregate Care. She felt the combination of a chemical and substance abuse treatment facility within 200 feet of a Level III group care facility could cause an adverse impact on a neighborhood. She advised that because of the desperate need for housing for the homeless she supported a zoning change for the subject property but since learning of the possible use of the property at 1569 South Ft. Harrison she has withdrawn her support and is now in opposition. She stated that the application on subject request included a survey that indicated the project was for 30 people and 4 employees which is more than Code allows. She felt the neighborhood was not appropriate for substance abuse or offender halfway facilities. She requested that if the Board approves the above request that the Board place carefully considered conditions (see attached). Ms. Harvey advised that the problem pointed out by Mrs. Cormier was noticed to staff. Ms. Harvey stated she has no evidence to advise the Board if there is a problem. She advised that a letter has been sent to Fairwinds asking for clarification of the issue, though there has been no response as yet. She advised applicant would be required to come before this Board if they propose to have something other than an ACLF for which the Fairwinds has received authorization. Ms. Harvey felt it is not reasonable to withhold action on the subject request, which has received nothing but support, because of something that might possibly be happening at another property. She stated it would be the property owner of the other property who would be required to have public hearings scheduled if it is proposing something than what was approved. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Ms. Harvey advised the conditional use would be approved subject to finalization of the rezoning. She added that if the use of the property is not realized she felt sure the Commission would initiate a rezoning back to what the property is currently zoned. After questioning by Ms. Nixon, Ms. Harvey stated the City fully recognizes that the number of people proposed is higher than what is allowed but the land area and the house would limit Isaiah's Inn to 15 people. She added that the Code will be changed in the future to allow up to 30 people. In rebuttal, Mr. Ward stated the by-laws of Isaiah's Inn prohibits serving people with chemical or substance abuse. He added that Isaiah's Inn is aware of the limitations in the Level III Group Care as far as the number of residents allowed but hopefully it can be worked out. Mr. Schwob felt the points raised in opposition have been satisfactorily answered. He felt with the level of support Isaiah's Inn has and the caliber of people behind the project, the organization will be a credit to the City. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the Building Permit be procured within months; and 2) That the proposed OL "Limited Office" zoning be finalized. Motion carried (6 to 1) with Mr. Hogan voting "nay." Mr. Hogan felt efforts should be channeled to the needy residents of the City rather than possibly attracting the homeless from elsewhere. He also felt the subject location was not the best location for the project. Ms. Harvey advised that had it not been for Ms. Cormier, the City would have had not idea of the potential problems at the South Ft. Harrison location. She stated she will keep the Board advised as the City's questions are answered. 7. Lot 6 and Part Lot 7 Pinellas Groves (2045 Palmetto Street) Everlasting Bread of Life Inc./ Bethamy Gardens, Ltd./Roger Larson CU 88-67 Request - Nursing Home (Expansion from 120 to 150 Beds) Zoned - P/SP (Public/Semi-Public) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for a nursing home, specifically increasing the numbers of beds from 120 to 150, in the Public/Semi-Public zoning district; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.025(b) and (c)(20); there is an existing nursing home and the applicant has purchased additional property to allow it to expand by an additional 30 beds; and, a preliminary site plan was reviewed by the Commission on August 4, 1988 subject to approval of a conditional use by this Board. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the above request subject to the following: 1) That the building permit be procured in accordance with the certified site plan. Atty. Roger Larson, representative of applicant, stated the center previously applied for an amended site plan to permit the construction of a 30-bed addition to the facility. He also stated that 9,000 square feet is being acquired from the adjacent Church in order for applicant to meet density requirements. Mr. Larson stated that all Code requirements have been met. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Larson stated the new facility will be almost identical to the current facility and will be an additional wing that will house the 30 beds. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Green, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the building permit be procured in accordance with the certified site plan. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 8. Lot 29, Bayside Sub. #2 (214 Brightwater Drive) Laurence J. Miller/ Myron Gibson Marine Const, Inc. CU 88-68 Request - Marina Zoned - CR-28 (Resort Commercial "Twenty-Eight") AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for a marina in the Aquatic Lands/Coastal zoning district with upland property zoned Resort Commercial Twenty-Eight; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.025(b) and (c)(18); the request is to construct 2 new 14 foot catwalks and 9 tie poles adjacent to 2 existing docks; the Traffic Engineer had no objection if parking is provided; and, the Harbormaster had no objection as long as slips are used by residents. Ms. Harvey advised that if the slips are to be used by residents only there would be no additional parking required. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval subject to the following: 1) That the slips are for adjacent upland residents only; 2) That there be no sale or rental of slips; and 3) That the Building permit be procured within 6 months. Mr. Myron Gibson, representative of applicant, stated the docks are designed specifically for the upland property owners, which is a 6-unit complex. He advised the adjacent property owners had no objection. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the slips are for adjacent upland residents only; 2) That there be no sale or rental of slips; and 3), That the Building permit be procured within 6 months. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 9. M&B 14.11, Sec. 18-29S-16E (408 U.S. Hwy. 19 North) Christopher F. Lawrence & Russell Dilly, Jr. (Sweethearts)/ Sandra Hoskins & Michael Mancuso/ Paul Castagliola CU 88-69 Request - 4-COP (On Premise Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages) Zoned - CH (Highway Commercial) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for on premise consumption of alcoholic beverages in the Highway Commercial zoning district; the specific request is for approval of a change of State license designation from 2-COP to 4-COP, which license includes the sales of beer, wine, and liquor; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.024 and 136.025(b); the Traffic Engineer commented there appears to be inadequate parking; and, the Police Department saw no reason to deny license to applicant. Ms. Harvey stated that, since there is no change in seating or floor area, there would be no requirement for additional parking. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the request subject to the following: 1) That the new alcoholic beverage license be procured within 6 months. Atty. Paul Castagliola, representative of applicant, stated the purpose of the request is merely to upgrade the license from a 2-COP to a 4-COP. He stated there will be no change in the operation and no variances are required. After questioning by Mr. Hogan, Mr. Castagliola advised applicant has not yet procured the new license from the State. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Hamilton, seconded by Mr. Green, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the new alcoholic beverage license be procured within 6 months. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). The Board recessed at 3:35 PM and reconvened at 3:45 PM. 10. M&B 23.03, Sec. 06-29S-16E (2215 Sunset Point Road) Webb's Nursery, Inc. (Jewel Osco)/ Skaggs Sav-On, Inc./Timothy Johnson CU 88-70 Request - 2-APS (Package Sales of Alcoholic Beverages) & 3-PS (Package Sales of Alcoholic Beverages) Zoned - CPD (Commercial Planned Development) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for package sales of alcoholic beverages in the Commercial Planned Development zoning district on property known as Beckett Lake Plaza; a supermarket is to be constructed on the property with an adjoining liquor store and the licenses required are a 2-APS for the supermarket and a 3-PS for the liquor store; the governing sections of the Land Development Code are Sections 136.024 and 136.025(b); the Traffic Engineer had no objection; and, the Police Department saw no reason to deny license to applicant. Ms. Harvey advised that staff recommended approval subject to the following: 1) That the building permit be procured within the time limitations set by the Certified Site Plan. Atty. Steve Seibert, representative of applicant, stated applicant is seeking conditional use approval for sale of beer and wine from the supermarket and beer, wine, and liquor from the liquor store. He stated the applicant has complied with all the laws of the Land Development Code. Mr. Seibert advised the operation is separated from residential areas and felt the requested use is sensible. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Ferrell, to approve the above request subject to the following: 1) That the building permit be procured within the time limitations set by the Certified Site Plan. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 11. M&Bs 11.05 & 11.06, Sec. 19-29S-16E (1260 U.S. Hwy. 19 South) V. L. Gillenwaters, Trustee/ Robert Veurink CU 88-71 Request - 1. Outdoor Retail Sales, Displays and/or Storage 2. Vehicle Service Zoned - CH (Highway Commercial) Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for outdoor retail sales, display and/or storage and vehicle service in the Highway Commercial zoning district; on November 3, 1987, this Board approved the same conditional use for this property subject to 1) that the use is restricted to boat service, 2) that there be no outdoor storage of parts, 3) that boats be stored on paved areas only, 4) that there be a 6 foot high opaque fence along the west property line, 5) that there be formal site plan review, and 6) that there be no noise generated service work such as engine testing after 6:00 PM; and, on November 17, 1987, this Board deleted condition 5 "that there be formal site plan review" after request from the applicant. Ms. Harvey also advised as follows: The applicant is now proposing to utilize an existing building for a family restaurant on the site in addition to boat sales, storage and service; the Traffic Engineer commented that the parking plan for the restaurant needs to be revised; a preliminary site plan has been reviewed by the City Commission and the site plan will be reviewed by the Traffic Engineer through formal site plan review; and, if the restaurant changes designation to a license without a food requirement, there will be a problem with parking. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval subject to the following: 1) That the use is restricted to boat service; 2) That there be no outdoor storage of parts; 3) That boats be stored on paved areas only, 4) That there be no noise generated service work such as engine testing after 6:00 PM; and, 5) That the building permit be procured within time limitations set by the Certified Site Plan. Mr. Donald Williams, Williams Architects, representative of applicant, stated he is available for questions. Mr. Donald Bush, Williams Architects, representative of applicant, stated the boats range in size mostly from 30 to 50 feet. He also stated service is conducted for boat preparation only and there is only one service bay area. He advised that low frequency traffic is anticipated. He also advised that the pervious surface is actually being increased from what exists today by increasing interior green space. Mr. Robert Veurink, applicant, appeared requesting approval of the conditional use. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Veurink stated the restaurant is to be subleased to another firm. He stated he will be concerned about the type of clientele that will frequent the restaurant and he is not looking for a problem. He added that the property owner has the right to review the operator of the restaurant and it will be a restaurant that has a license that requires 51% in food sales. Ms. Harvey expressed concern that applicant should make sure display area will not interfere with parking for the restaurant. Mr. Veurink stated the parking for boats and parking for the restaurant are marked on the site plan. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Hogan, seconded by Mr. Hamilton, to approved the above request subject to the following: 1) That the use is restricted to boat service; 2) That there be no outdoor storage of parts; 3) That boats be stored on paved areas only, 4) That there be no noise generated service work such as engine testing after 6:00 PM; and, 5) That the building permit be procured within time limitations set by the Certified Site Plan. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). C. Annexation, Zoning Atlas and Land Use Plan Amendment and Local Planning Agency Review: 1. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88) Lots 15 through 19, Dunromin Sub. (Located at the northeast corner of the Intersection of South Belcher Road and Wistful Vista Drive) (Wilson) A 88-17 Request - Annexation and Zoning, OL (Limited Office) The above property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of South Belcher Road and Wistful Vista Drive. Ms. Harvey advised this is a request for annexation and OL (Limited Office) zoning and sewer and water are available. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the request for annexation and OL (Limited Office) zoning. Ms. Kim A. Conlon, representative of applicant, stated improvements will be made to the property and they request the annexation in order to receive City sewer services. She added that the OL zoning is requested. No persons appeared in support of or in opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Hamilton, seconded by Mr. Green, to recommend approval of the above request for annexation and OL (Limited Office) zoning. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 2. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88) Lot 2, Coral Cove Sub. (Located on the east side of Belcher Road, south of Drew Street) (Southland Corp., Sunshine Division/City) LUP 88-8 Z 88-12 Zoning Atlas: FROM: CG (General Commercial) TO: OL (Limited Office) Land Use Plan: FROM: Commercial/Tourist Facilities TO: Residential/Office The above property is located on the east side of Belcher Road, south of Drew Street. Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a City-initiated request, at the request of the City Commission, for a zoning atlas amendment from CG (General Commercial) to OL (Limited Office) and a Land Use Plan amendment from Commercial/Tourist Facilities to Residential/Office; previously, the City Commission approved a site plan for the subject site and the property owner agreed to share the driveway with the adjoining property owner. Then the property owner did not go forward with building plans. The property owner later submitted a site plan to develop the property with a convenience store, which was to include a request for beer sales although application was not received to allow such sales. Since that time the property owner has been unable to develop the property. Ms. Harvey stated the City Commission directed the Planning Department to initiate an application to rezone the subject property to something other than commercial and the property is before this Board today as a public hearing. Ms. Harvey advised staff recommended approval of the above request for a zoning atlas amendment from CG (General Commercial) to OL (Limited Office) and a Land Use Plan amendment from Commercial/Tourist Facilities to Residential/Office. Mr. Alan Brandes, real estate officer for Southland Corp, stated the site was selected with the hope of locating a convenience store and gas pumps at the subject location. He stated the size of the property would allow the development of possibly a strip center. He stated that since the City laws have changed and conditional use approval is now required for beer and wine sales the value of the property has gone down. He added that if the property is rezoned the value will lower even further. Mr. Brandes felt the property is a business investment and felt Southland should have the right to market the property as commercial property. No persons appeared in support of or opposition to the above request. Mr. Hamilton expressed concern about changing zoning on a property when a property owner doesn't want it and if the property owner cannot develop it, it is the property owner's problem. He stated he does not object to Limited Office zoning on the property but felt it should not be the City's decision. Mr. Green felt the property should not be rezoned and expressed concern about taking away a property owner's rights. After questioning by Mr. Hogan, Ms. Harvey stated she is not sure if the property was commercial when it was annexed into the City. She stated Coral Cove was commercial and this property was an out parcel. Mr. Schwob felt alcoholic beverage sales at the subject location would be a problem and felt there could be commercial development on the property that was not incompatible with the nearby property owners. Mr. Hogan felt the property owner should have the opportunity to sell the property. Motion was made by Mr. Hamilton, seconded by Mr. Hogan, to recommend denial of the above request for a zoning atlas amendment from CG (General Commercial) to OL (Limited Office) and a Land Use Plan amendment from Commercial/Tourist Facilities to Residential/Office. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 3. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88) PARCEL #1 AND PARCEL #2 (Located on the south side of Airport Drive, west of Gilbert Street) (S.C.C. Development Corp., Inc.) LUP 88-5 Z 88-8 PARCEL #1: Part M&B 33.01, Sec. 12-29S-15E & Lots 7 through 21, Part Lots 6 and 22, Blk. C, and Vacated Streets, Drew Heights Sub. Zoning Atlas: FROM: RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") TO: RS-8 (Single Family Residential "Eight") Land Use Plan: FROM: Medium Density Residential TO: Low Density Residential PARCEL #2 Part M&B 33.01, Sec. 12-29S-15E & Lots 1 through 5, Lots 23 through 28, Part Lots 6 and 22, Blk. C, and Vacated Streets, Drew Heights Sub. Zoning Atlas: FROM: RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") TO: AL/I (Aquatic Lands/Interior) The above property is located on the south side of Airport Drive, west of Gilbert Street. The applicant was not present. Ms. Harvey advised as follows: This is a request for a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to RS-8 (Single Family Residential "Eight") and a Land Use Plan amendment from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for PARCEL #1 and a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to AL/I (Aquatic Lands/Interior) for PARCEL #2; the request was a condition of preliminary plat approval when it was reviewed by the City Commission on November 11, 1987; and the rezoning on Parcel #2 is proposed to protect an environmentally sensitive land area. Ms. Harvey advised that staff recommended approval of the request for a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to RS-8 (Single Family Residential "Eight") and a Land Use Plan amendment from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for PARCEL #1 and a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to AL/I (Aquatic Lands/Interior) for PARCEL #2. No persons appeared in support of or opposition to the above request. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Green, to recommend approval of the request for a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to RS-8 (Single Family Residential "Eight") and a Land Use Plan amendment from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential for PARCEL #1 and a zoning atlas amendment from RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") to AL/I (Aquatic Lands/Interior) for PARCEL #2. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). AGENDA ITEMS C(4) AND C(5) WERE DISCUSSED TOGETHER. 4. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88 & TO BE CONTINUED TO 08/30/88) PARCEL #1 AND PARCEL #2 (Located at the eastern terminus of Seville Boulevard) (Clearwater Seville, Ltd. and AEL Partnership) LUP 88-11 A 88-20 PARCEL #1: M&B 34.01, and Part M&Bs 21.01 & 34.02 Secs. 17-29S-16E & 20-29S-16E Request - Annexation and Zoning, RM-28 (Multiple Family Residential "Twenty-Eight") Land Use Plan: FROM: Medium Density Residential TO: High Density Residential PARCEL #2: Part M&Bs 21.01 & 34.02 Secs. 17-29S-16E & 20-29S-16E Request - Annexation and Zoning, AL/C (Aquatic Lands/Coastal) The above property is located at the eastern terminus of Seville Boulevard. 5. (CONTINUED FROM 7/26/88 & TO BE CONTINUED TO 08/30/88) M&B 33.06, Sec. 17-29S-16E (Located south of existing Seville Condominiums and south of Pearce Drive [Private Street]) (Clearwater Seville, Ltd.) LUP 88-12 Z 88-14 Zoning Atlas: FROM: RM-12 (Multiple Family Residential "Twelve") TO: RM-28 (Multiple Family Residential "Twenty-Eight") Land Use Plan: FROM: Medium Density Residential TO: High Density Residential The above property is located south of existing Seville Condominiums and south of Pearce Drive [Private Street]. Ms. Harvey advised it is necessary for the applicant to submit an impact assessment on the above items and it has not yet been submitted. She also advised it would be necessary for the above items to be continued to the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting scheduled for August 30, 1988. Motion was made by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Green, to continue the above items C(4) and C(5) to the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting scheduled for August 30, 1988. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). D. Report from Healey Consultant Group, Inc. On Development Process Study Ms. Harvey advised that City was awarded through the Pinellas Planning Council a Metropolitan Planning Grant to look at the permitting process in Clearwater. She advised this Board and the City Commission are both aware of problems concerning length of time to process applications/permits, where to go for processing, etc. Mr. Dave Healey, Healey Consultant Group, Inc., explained his requirements of the contract and the process he will follow and what is required of him in completing his study. He explained the information he was looking for to complete his study. He stated a similar questionnaire was also forwarded to the Building Contractors Association. He advised that a task force has been set up with the Chamber of Commerce and a 5-person in-house committee has been established to also look at current requirements and future changes. After questioning by Mr. Schwob, Mr. Healey advised the proposed reorganization will be considered while he is conducting his study. Mr. Healey advised 3 basics steps must be followed in completing the study, those being how the current system works now, analyzing the pluses and minuses of the current system, and making the necessary recommendations. Mr. Healey gave questionnaires to the Board members to fill out and return at a later date. He explained the questions and what the Board should consider in answering them. He stated he wanted to know what the Board perceived as its point of view or the applicant's point of view. Ms. Harvey stated that inspection and enforcement is becoming increasingly important to this Board because this Board sets parameters and special conditions when approving conditional uses. Mr. Healey advised the Board to first identify what procedures they are involved in and then to state how adequately they feel the procedures work. After discussion, the Board decided to schedule a work session for the next Planning and Zoning Board Meeting to discuss the individual questions as a group and the submit the completed questionnaire individually to Mr. Healey. Meeting adjourned at 5:07 PM.