Loading...
02/18/1992 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1992 - 1:30 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION Members Present: Chairman Mazur, Bickerstaffe, Carassas, Hamilton, Merriam, Savage and Schwob. Also present: Scott Shuford, Planning Manager James Polatty, Director Planning & Development Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney Pat Fernandez, Recording Secretary Chairperson Mazur 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. ITEM A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approved (motion Mr. Schwob, second Mr. Carassas) minutes of February 4, 1992 with one correction. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). B. REQUESTS FOR EXTENSION, DEFERRED AND CONTINUED ITEMS: 1. M&B's 41.01 and 41.03, Sec. 18-29-16, (20568 U.S. 19 N) Angel Properties (Stingers), CU 91-15 Request - To permit on premise consumption of beer, wine and liquor Zoned - CH (Highway Commercial) Mr. Shuford advised that the applicant's representative, Timothy Johnson, delivered a letter on behalf of the applicant, withdrawing the request. C. CONDITIONAL USES: 1. Lots 1 thru 4, Blk 1, Knollwood Replat (1400 Cleveland St) R C Lawler, Inc. (Double-B, Inc/Cypress Pub), CU 92-12 Request - To permit on-premise consumption of package sales of beer and wine Zoned - CG (General Commercial) Mr. Shuford gave the background of the case and submitted, in writing, the staff recommendation. Applicant's representative, John Bozmoski, 406 S. Prospect Avenue, Suite B, stated the hours of operation will be from 11:00 am to 2:00 am. A father and son team will be operating the business and have been working there to gain experience. Pro or Con: None Approved (motion by Mr. Schwob, second by Mr. Merriam) subject to the following conditions: 1) The requisite occupational license shall be obtained within six (6) months from the expiration date of its current occupational license; 2) There shall be no outdoor seating or other expansion of the floor area devoted to the proposed use; 3) The package sales of alcoholic beverages shall comply with the requirements of Section 72.15 of the City Code; and 4) No customer accessible shelf space for package sales shall be provided. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 2. M&B 21.01 and 32.02, Sec 17-29-16 (20505 US Hwy 19 N, Suite 101, Clearwater Mall) Trizec Western, Inc./Trizec Properties, Inc (Skipper's Ice Cream Cafe and Eatery of Clwr, Inc), CU 92-13 Request - To permit on-premise consumption of beer and wine Zoned - CC (Commercial Center and OL (Limited Office) Applicant, Joseph Ranieri, 221 Bell Forest Drive, Apt 2, Belleair Bluffs, stated he will manage the restaurant. Robert Resch, agent for Graham Design, 210 Orangewood Avenue, stated the restaurant has been improved, is upscale and family clientele can now be offered their choice of beverage. Pro or Con: None Approved (motion by Mr. Schwob, second by Mr. Savage) subject to the following conditions: 1) The sales of alcoholic beverages shall be restricted to consumption on-premises with no package sales; 2) The requisite occupational license shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing; and 3) The applicant shall obtain approval from the City Commission for a variance to the 200 ft. separation distance from another similarly licensed 2-COP (Schnickel Fritz) on premises consumption sales establishment. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 3. Lots 43 thru 48, 65 thru 71, and part of Lot 64, Clwr Beach Park (470 Mandalay Ave) Pelican Two Inc (PSA, Inc/Ocean Garden), CU 92-14 Request - To permit on-premise consumption and package sales of beer, wine, and liquor Zoned - CB (Beach Commercial and CR-28 (Resort Commercial) Mr. Shuford gave the background of the case and submitted, in writing, the staff recommendation. Applicant's representative, John Simms, 318 Barbara Circle, 34616, stated they want to transfer one of the oldest licenses on the Beach for this 250 seat restaurant. He believes his client paid a significant amount of money for the license and does not feel additional restrictions should be placed. He does not feel there has been a problem with the previous owner and does not want a prohibition of customer accessible shelf space. In response to a question regarding the inadequacy of 21 parking spaces that are grandfathered, he stated there was an overflow lot owned by a corporation comprised of the some of the same principals that services the restaurant. Mr. Shuford was not aware of the overflow parking lot (with 42 spaces) now being used by the restaurant and suggested a condition for perimeter landscaping and requiring a Unity of Title to tie the lot to the restaurant for perpetuity. It was noted the sign on the lot indicated parking for Ocean Garden. Applicant, Elias Anastasopoulos, 1600 Gulf Boulevard, stated Mr. Simms is his representative at this meeting. He advised the property was expensive and in the future might possibly have a separate corner within the restaurant to sell package liquors. He advised the overflow lot is owned by a different corporation but mostly the same principals. That piece of property is to be developed for another use. Manager, George Athens, 1018 Bay Esplanade, stated he is from the area and has the education and experience to manage this operation. His family owns a hotel at the beach. The Board questioned adding extra conditions beyond those which applied to the Pelican. Because the applicant mentioned the remote parking, it appears unfair to penalize him for his candor. If however, the restaurant were still owned by the Pelican and they wanted to sell the overflow lot, would the 21 parking spaces at the restaurant site be legal as they are grandfathered in? Additional parking has been made available for a number of years and the restaurant would lose if there is inadequate customer parking. If an expansion were planned, parking could then be addressed. Pro: (1) Henry Cruise, 1915 Sever Drive, Clearwater, stated Mr. Henriquez did not have the overflow lot 20 years ago and therefore should be allowed to operate without the overflow parking. Approved (motion by Mr. Carassas, and second by Mr. Bickerstaffe) subject to the following conditions: 1) Any requisite changes in licensing shall be obtained within 6 months; and 2) No customer accessible shelf space shall be provided for package sales. Before voting, members asked for a recess to determine if Code covers this situation. Staff will ask Legal if a parking area which is remote and owned by a separate corporation which has been used by an applicant for a number of years to provide patron parking is legally considered necessary to meet parking requirements. The meeting reconvened with Mr. Lance in attendance. In a conversation with staff, Mr. Lance believes the lot is deemed contiguous with the restaurant property and in similar situations has been considered required parking. He will have Mr. Galbraith review and give his opinion. Mr. Shuford advised that, regardless of what this Board does, if the remote lot is linked to the restaurant and the remote lot is considered required parking, the City can enforce that. All discussion having been concluded, the motion on the floor was voted upon and the carried unanimously (7 to 0). Chairman Mazur advised the applicant that there is a drainage outlet on Mandalay with a pipe going from a drainage outlet back into the building. The previous owner discharged into the storm sewer system and asked the applicant to look into and correct this problem. 4. Lots 57 thru 63 and part of Lot 64, Clwr Beach Park (490 Mandalay Ave) Mary G Realty, Inc. (N&T Food Center, Inc), CU 92-15 Request - To permit on-premise consumption and package sales of beer and wine Zoned - CB (Beach Commercial) Mr. Shuford gave the background of the case and submitted, in writing, the staff recommendation. Letters of objection have been received from: (1) Edwin R. Hunter, Clearwater Beach Motel, objecting because of proximity to other alcohol licenses, believe upscale retail was goal for north end of beach, Code violations with outdoor seating; and inadequacy of parking. (2) James R. Gray indicates proposed uses abut his motel property and asks for denial based on number of alcoholic licenses, a signed agreement between applicant and himself to build a 25' sound barrier wall has not been built, and parking concerns. (3) George Greer, attorney for Sam Moussa, Holiday House Lessee, and James Gray, Owner of Holiday House advised applicant has not abided with either the agreement to build a solid wall or a previous variance granted in 1984 by the Board of Adjustment by building a door, without permit, in the back of the building. A copy of the wall agreement was submitted. Applicant's representative, Michael Boutzoukas, 1801 N. Belcher Road, Suite 116, 34624, stated the applicant has owned the market since 1976 and now wishes to convert the license to use in a family restaurant serving both Greek and Italian food. A violation of interior seating at the bakery no longer exists as they have closed the operation. Another lessee will reopen and operate it strictly as a bakery. A request was made for a later closing and feels the 11:00 pm closing restriction is unreasonable. Applicant, Nick Gionis, 130 Windward Island, 34620, stated that while Mr. Boutzoukas is not listed on the application, he is his representative. Mr. Gionis was the manager of a restaurant in New York and has ran his deli for 17 years. The dumpster is on Baymont to the north of the center. He advised he would be happy with a midnight closing time. Pro: None Con: (1) Jeannie Reid, co-owner Chubby's Cafe, 2266 Gulf-To-Bay, stated she is opposed because this new operation will open next to their business. Further, when they applied for their conditional use they requested a later closing but 10:00 pm was established as the whole plaza closed at that time. (2) Harold Reid, co-owner Chubby's Cafe, P.O. Box 3695, 34630, stated he feels, if permission is granted for a back door to the applicant, that other tenants of the center should also have back doors. They previously requested one, but the applicant said no. (3) Tracy Reid, 1604 N. Osceola Avenue, represents 10 other businesses in the area and submitted a petition with 266 signatures opposing the alcoholic license for the restaurant. Mr. Shuford advised Planning will copy and return the originals so they can present them to the City Commission. Some signees contacted her as they knew of her opposition to this request. She advised they mainly objected due to the number of licenses in the area as well as inadequate parking. She stated the applicant usually does first, without permission, and then pays the fine. This was evidenced by outdoor seating associated with the applicant's deli and a subsequent fine. Anything they get must have written approval from the applicant. They cannot move their air-conditioning, get bigger units, or put in a back door. (4) Brenda Reid, 1606 N. Osceola Avenue, stated she is concerned about the parking. The two handicap spots, due to construction, have been covered by 2 port-a-potties and a dumpster. The police have had to be called on many weekends to clear out the parking lot to allow customers to park. (5) Robert Reid, 1604 N. Osceola Avenue, is associated with Chubby's Cafe and stated the emergency door leads to a 3' space with a steel gate at the end with a double key lock. He feels no one could get out if they wanted to. (6) William Welch, 2266 Gulf-To-Bay, has been employed by Chubbys for approximately 3 years and opposes the application. (7) Joyce Grove, 2266 Gulf-To-Bay, works for her sister in Chubby's Cafe, and stated she does has never seen tactics like those of the applicant. She asked where deliveries would be received. (8) Gina Fouche, 615 Oak Avenue, 34616, advised parking is such a problem at the beach that she needs to get to work one hour early to find a space. She feels this is a family business and another restaurant will generate more noise and more drinking. (9) Greg Trimboli, 1354 E. 58th Street, St. Petersburg, stated the beach does not need any more parking problems or more alcohol particularly on the weekends. He is employed by Eckerds. His employer has a big parking lot and even that is insufficient. In response to a question, he indicated that Sertoma does still rent part of the parking lot to beach traffic during the day. Rebuttal - In answer to those opposing: (1) Competition aspects cannot be covered by this Board; (2) Applicant now has right to sell in a package situation which is more harmful than their request for on-premises consumption; (3) The emergency door is covered by the permit provided earlier; and (4) The parking is within regulation requirements. Board Discussion - In response to Board questions, the applicant's representative stated: (1) The dumpster is located half on the applicant's property and the other half on Mr. Gray's property. Applicant will advise the construction personnel to move the objects that are in the handicap parking spots; (2) Chubbys does not have an exclusive right to sell alcoholic beverages. The disparity was mentioned in the difference between parking requirements for free-standing restaurants versus one the same size in a plaza. Mr. Merriam stated that when Gionis Plaza was built there was a commitment to the Board of Adjustment by the owner that there would be no restaurants. While it might not have been put in the minutes, such a commitment would be on the meeting tapes. There are now two restaurants. Mr. Shuford advised restaurants have been permitted because nothing was explicit in either the minutes or the motion to approve the variance to restrict the restaurant use. This request is for consumption on premise with no package sales as the State will not allow both simultaneously. Mr. Shuford perceives the need for a Code amendment addressing the differences between parking for a restaurant in strip centers and free-standing restaurants. Approved (motion by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr.Hamilton) subject to the following conditions: 1) Unless required by life and safety code, there shall be no doorways on the west side of the building; 2) There shall be no outdoor seating associated with this establishment or the subject property; 3) Approval shall be for on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages only with no package sales; 4) The requisite occupational license shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing; 5) The building shall be used in such a manner as to retain its status as a retail center; 6) The applicant shall obtain the requisite alcoholic beverage distance separation variances from the City Commission; 7) All signage on the property shall be brought into compliance with the City sign regulations on or before October 13, 1992; 8) The closing time for the use shall be no later than that of other COP establishments in the same retail center, or 11:00 pm, whichever is earlier; 9) There shall be no entertainment associated with the use; and 10) There shall be no outdoor speakers. Motion carried (5 to 2) with Mr. Merriam and Mr. Bickerstaffe dissenting. D. ANNEXATION, ZONING, LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENT, AND LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REVIEW: 1. Lots 17-27, Blk 2, Lake Belleview Add, located on the south side of Lakeview Rd between the Seaboard Coastline Railroad and the S Myrtle Ave intersection (Gerald S. Rehm & Assoc, Inc.) Z 90-09 Request - Amendment to the Zoning Atlas ZONING: FROM: CH (Neighborhood Commercial) TO: IL (Limited Industrial) Mr. Polatty gave the background of the case and submitted, in writing, the staff recommendation. He asked the applicant to withdraw his request (no additional fees will be required) and reapply for Industrial Planned Development. The request should also cover zoning on the two (2) lots where the zoning district cuts through the middle of the building. Mr. Polatty suggested joint meetings with the neighbors to clear up any misconceptions. Mr. Rehm said he spoke with the two people who had major concerns and felt such meetings were unnecessary. Applicant, Gerald Rehm, 721 Lakeview Road, states he is chagrined that untruths have been passed around regarding his application. He wants to give land to the City for the extension of Myrtle in return for the remainders on the west side of Myrtle that would ultimately accrue go to his building. He now leases the warehouse and stores finished product from the candy factory. He inquired about tying the warehouse he lessees into this new zoning; however, Mr. Polatty stated he did not feel the City would include the warehouse in this action. Robert Meeks, 800 Dempsey Street, has no objection to Mr. Rehm's request for rezoning. Con: None Approved (motion by Mr. Hamilton, seconded by Mr. Bickerstaffe) to continue Agenda Item D-1 to the meeting of April 14, 1992. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). 2. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments: a. AMENDMENTS TO OBJECTIVE 1.4, CONCERNING POPULATION DENSITY IN THE COASTAL ZONE. The proposed amendments to Objective 1.4 address the recommendation of the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force concerning density incentives for bringing structures into conformity with F.E.M.A. standards, city and state building codes, and local land development regulations. b. AMENDMENT TO OBJECT 2.1 CONCERNING NEW COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. This amendment is made to provide an additional year to consider other areas of the city as community redevelopment districts. The scheduling of the Downtown Development Plan has necessitated this change. c. AMENDMENTS TO POLICIES 2.2.1 AND 2.2.2. CONCERNING THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY. These amendments are proposed to adjust the timing of the Downtown Clearwater Community Redevelopment District changes and an overall economic development strategy consistent with the scheduling of the Downtown Development Plan. d. AMENDMENTS TO POLICY 3.2.1. CONCERNING INTERPRETATION OF THE LAND USE MAP. 1. The amendment to the discussion/description of the Downtown Development District plan classification is to reflect the changes to Downtown zoning associated with the Downtown Development Plan. 2. The amendment to the discussion/description of the Conservation plan classification is intended to clarify current zoning districts/regulations included in the Conservation classification. e. AMENDMENT TO POLICY 19.1.1. CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT SEAWARD OF THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE (CCCL). This amendment is intended to clarify the intent of this policy - to insure that development does not occur seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), except for public purposes or in the case of unique circumstances which warrant variances. Reference to development densities is deleted since the CCCL is a structure placement guideline, not a determinant of intensity of development. f. AMENDMENT TO OBJECTIVE 19.7. CONCERNING REDEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES ON CLEARWATER BEACH. This amendment is intended to bring the timing of the actions associated with this objective into conformance with the changes proposed for Objective 2.1 above. The scheduling of the Downtown Development Plan has necessitated this change. g. AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT CONCERNING PROJECTS, TIMING AND FUNDING. These amendments bring the Capital Improvement Element into conformity with the adopted Capital Improvement Program for the City of Clearwater. Mr. Shuford gave the background of the amendments to the Zoning Atlas and submitted, in writing, the staff recommendation. Item d.1., due to the delay in the Downtown Development Plan, should not be changed at this time. Recommend (motion by Mr. Schwob, seconded by Mr. Savage) to the City Commission approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments covered in Agenda Item D.2., letters a. through f., but excluding d.1. above. Motion carried unanimously (7 to 0). E. CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS The Chairman discussed: 1) Inquired as to the application for a CU for the Veranda restaurant at the last meeting. Mr. Shuford advised a letter was sent. 2) The packets being delivered on Friday does not give members adequate time to review material fully for the Planning & Zoning Board meeting. With the holiday being the day before this meeting, it made staff unavailable then if there were any questions. Mr. Mazur asked if they could be delivered one week in advance. It was suggested that the application dates be moved back; however, Mr. Polatty is hesitant to make our process any longer than it is now. Mr. Mazur agreed that the Board get the packet a week to ten days early and receive the staff reports as at present. They will determine how this works out over the next two months. 3) The Chairman discussed an article that appeared in the Clearwater Times using various quotes on the issue of conflicts. The article seemed to infer that when a conflict is declared it could impact the other Board members in their decision-making process. Members on this Board feel they go that extra mile to display sensitivity and be fair in making their judgements. 4) The issue of minority and women's representation on various city boards was mentioned. The map showing dots where a board member lives proved there is a broad base with respect to where they live. 5) Mr. Shuford related his conversation with the City Attorney with regard to Legal's review of the new annual proposed Board's Rules and Regulations. He brought up two matters. One is where we cited specific sections of the Code. The City Attorney feels that since we are recodifying the Code, that the specific section number may change, therefore,the section should not be mentioned. Also the Attorney stated the Chairperson, if he/she declares a conflict, cannot run the meeting. F. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Mr. Polatty mentioned that the City Commission would have been interested in the petition submitted against Rite Aid. Petitions are given to each Board separately. It was felt each Board should be aware of a petition's existence dealing with an item under review and that such a petition should and will, in the future, be included in the agenda item or staff reports. G. BOARD AND STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Carassas asked if the Agenda could go back into the column format. He will accept extra space below each item which will allow members the space to write in pertinent information or comments. The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 p.m. James M. Polatty, Jr., Director, Planning & Development