Loading...
07/18/1995 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD July 18, 1995 Members Present: Kemper Merriam, Chair Jay Keyes , Vice Chair Robert D. Bickerstaffe Edward Mazur John Carassas Brenda Nixon Bernie Baron Also Present: Sandra Glatthorn, Manager, Central Permitting Gwen Legters, Board Reporter, City Clerk Department The Chairman 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 Department. Florida Law requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal. In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. A. Approval of Minutes - June 27, 1995 Member Merriam questioned page 3 of the minutes regarding inclusion of staff condition #5 in the Kapok Pavilion motion (CU 94-47). It was indicated consensus had been to include the condition, amending it to read, "Kapok Pavilion shall police the parking lot to avoid nuisance behavior...". Member Carassas moved to approve the minutes of June 27, 1995, in accordance with copies submitted to each Board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. Requests for Extension, Deferred and Continued Items B1. (cont. from 6/13/95) Faith United Church of Christ, Inc to permit child day care at 2401 Drew Street, Sec 18-29-16, M&B 12.02 and Eastwood Terrace 3rd Addition, Blk F, Lots 1, 3-6, zoned P/SP (Public/Semi Public). CU 95-38 Ms. Glatthorn gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. She stated this item was continued from June 13 to allow the applicant time to relocate the proposal to the southeast corner of the site in response to concerns expressed by the neighbors. Staff worked with the applicant to accomplish this and recommended approval subject to two standard conditions. Paul Hall, representing the child care center Board of Directors, outlined the changes to the proposal. He stated the play area will be fenced with chain link, the drive widened and perimeter landscaping provided. He agreed with staff recommendations. Vangie Mosich, President of the Board of Directors and Pastor David Charles Smith spoke in support of the application. The applicants were commended for coming back with such an excellent plan. Member Bickerstaffe moved to approve Item B1 subject to the following conditions: 1) The requisite building and parking lot permits shall be obtained prior to installation of the modular building and no later than six months after the date of this public hearing; and 2) the perimeter landscaping requirements of Sec. 42.27 shall be provided prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy/use. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B2. (Referred by Commission 5/4/95) 509 Bayview Ave and 508 Meadow Lark Lane, McMullen Bayview Sub, Tract A, Blk 3, Lots 1 & 2 and south 1/2 of right-of-way to the north (R. Roy Meador) Z 93-54; LUP 93-43 Ms. Glatthorn gave the background of the case regarding previous hearings, site plan changes and conditions. She enumerated the Development Review Committee's (DRC) recommended site plan changes and presented, in writing, staff recommendations. Member Mazur expressed concern with having alcoholic beverages available where gasoline is sold. It was indicated the beer and wine sales portion of this application is a part of the site plan, because it is a planned development, not a separate conditional use. For clarification, it was indicated a conditional use for the retention pond was requested as a separate item due to the pond extending into the residential lot to the south. Harry Cline, attorney representing the applicant, displayed a map of the site. He described how each of the previously expressed concerns has been addressed. He displayed a second map of the site as it would appear under a Commercial Planned Development (CPD) zoning. He stated they worked extensively with the City forester regarding the location of the retention pond, and 19 of the 20 trees on the site will be saved. Landscape buffering is to exceed the requirements. Mr. Cline said the estimate for building the requested eight foot masonry wall along the southerly boundary was over $14,000 and was not feasible. He stated a six foot wooden fence will be built instead. Other concerns addressed were reconfiguration of the gas pump islands, narrowing the driveway and relocating a dumpster. Discussion ensued regarding location of the retention pond. In response to a question regarding the exact placement of the pond, it was indicated the legal description is on the site plan. Two citizens spoke in support of the application as follows: William S. Connolly, owner of the adjacent property to the east, felt the applicant has done everything asked of him and should be allowed to improve his property. Robert Roy Meador, Jr., the owner/applicant, stated the subject property has been in his family for 50 years. He said no one accepted his offer to donate the house on the southerly lot and he had it demolished. He wishes to be able to improve the property and reviewed his efforts to satisfy neighbors' concerns. Eleven citizens spoke in opposition to the application as follows: Breck Parker, area resident, expressed environmental and historical concerns. He stated a $7,000 estimate for a masonry wall was faxed to the applicant. He gave a brief history of the houses and property owners in the vicinity and Commission action regarding the site. Sherry Collins, area resident, expressed concern with neighborhood safety for her daughter. She stated she has worked with her neighbors to reduce the number of transients and drug and alcohol related problems in the area. Charles Martin, 20 year area resident, distributed copies of a historic resources survey prepared by Howard Hansen. Mr. Martin indicated the neighborhood has declined. Jack Alvord, area resident, spoke regarding property ownership and responsibility of government to observe its own laws. He listed other applications granted against the wishes of Bayview residents. He complained his water well was cut off when the old McMullen house was demolished. Terry Dopking read a letter from Brian P. Mullen, who could not attend. Mr. Mullen requested these hearings be held at night. He felt a bigger gas station was not needed, would not create jobs and would encourage more transients. Ms. Dopking expressed concerns regarding rezoning, alcohol sales and the safety of her children. Mary Alvord referred to a chronology of the gas station she said was contained in the case file. She opposed the rezoning, naming numerous groups which have spoken and petitioned in opposition. She cited specific standards for approval she felt were being violated. Barbara Sartor, Dunedin resident, stated her mother is an adjacent property owner to the south. She indicated there are strong memories of the area and they did not want to see it degenerate. Mary B. McMullen, adjacent property owner, opposed the rezoning because of the proximity to her back yard. She wished for a better plan that would enable her to better enjoy her home. Dennis Grinstead, adjacent business owner, opposed the Land Use Plan amendment, indicating the proposal was not appropriate for the property. He expressed concern the proposal would put his small grocery store out of business. In response to questions, Mr. Grinstead stated he carries a full line of groceries and convenience items. He said his prices are competitive with those in convenience stores and all of his business comes from the neighborhood. Early McMullen Sorenson, area resident, stated he hopes to live here all his life. Reading from the Code, he expressed concerns the rezoning is not compatible with the area. He did not feel the proximity of the two residential lots to Gulf to Bay Boulevard poses a hardship for the applicant. He cited examples of how other similarly situated residential properties have dealt with the matter. Mr. Sorenson described conditions existing on the surrounding properties and how the proposal affects them. Allan Stowell, Clearwater resident, expressed concern the application violates the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Reading from the Code, he stated the standards for approval are not being met. He read from a letter written by Attorney John Hubbard concerning violation of the zoning standards. Mr. Stowell displayed a map highlighting the proposed rezoning, stating it is not in the public interest and is incompatible with surrounding uses. Mr. Hubbard's letter was submitted for the record at the request of the Board. In closing, Mr. Cline responded to the concerns of the opposition, reiterating how each is to be addressed. He displayed a map of the Gulf to Bay Boulevard corridor, demonstrating the application is in line with zoning in the area. Concerning placement of the proposal in a more northerly location, Mr. Cline indicated setbacks cannot be met and again recounted Mr. Mayberry's extensive review of the site. In response to questions Mr. Cline pointed out the land into which the pond extends belongs to the applicant. He expressed the view that zoning is intended to be transitional and should change slightly as goals change over time. Concerning the historical nature of the neighborhood, Mr. Cline pointed out the Fina station has been there for 50 years and the owners are entitled to some ability to maintain it. He stated the remaining residential lot to the south, though irregularly shaped, has single family zoning and meets code. In response to a question, Mr. Cline stated this project is site specific and any other construction would be subject to Board approval. Concern was expressed this seems to be a massive project for the small number of pumps involved. Clarification was requested. Jim Smith, President of the Co-op Oil Company, responded to questions. He stated Rich Baier, the City Engineer, advocated the proposed configuration to avoid traffic stacking up into the right-of-way. He said there will be three pumping units with three hoses on each side, for a total of 18 hoses. The diesel pump was eliminated due to environmental concerns associated with use of the fuel. He estimated 15 percent of his revenue comes from alcoholic beverage sales. While he agreed drinking while driving is a problem, he felt the ability to sell alcohol was necessary for the business to remain viable. Board members in support of the request felt the applicant could not have done more to mitigate any impact to the surrounding properties. The plan to improve, not expand the existing business was felt to be common sense. While it was agreed a gas station is not the best use in a residential area, it was indicated that use exists in many places and should not be required to move out to accommodate the neighbors. It was noted the applicant has done everything asked of him to protect the neighborhood and the environment. No reason was found for the project not to proceed. While not rejecting the proposal as a whole, members not in support of the request expressed their reservations. Opposition to selling one or two cans of beer to drivers was voiced. It was felt the project does not align with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Concerns were expressed the application does not support the standards for approval. The impact of a commercial property encroaching into a residential area was protested. Concern was expressed with splitting the lots. It was felt approving the application would compromise the Board's commitment to serve the public and set an unwanted precedent. Member Carassas moved, concerning Item B2, to endorse the Future Land Use Plan amendment to Commercial General and Zoning Atlas amendment to Commercial Planned Development as requested. The motion was duly seconded and, upon the vote being taken, Members Keyes, Nixon, Carassas, and Baron voted "Aye"; Members Merriam, Mazur, and Bickerstaffe voted "Nay." Motion carried. B3. (cont. from 6/27/95) R. Roy Meador, Trustee of the R. Roy Meador Revocable Living Trust to permit utility facilities; detention pond at 509 Bayview Ave & 508 Meadowlark Lane, Town of Bayview Sub a/k/a McMullen's Bay View Sub, Blk 3, part of Lots 1 & 2, zoned RS 6 (Single Family Residential). CU 95-45 Member Carassas moved, concerning Item B3, to approve a conditional use for a retention pond (utility facility) on Lots 1 and 2, Town of Bayview, subject to the adoption of the requested Future Land Use Plan Amendment to Commercial General and Zoning Atlas Amendment to Commercial Planned Development. The motion was duly seconded and, upon the vote being taken, Members Keyes, Mazur, Nixon, Carassas, and Baron voted "Aye"; Members Merriam and Bickerstaffe voted "Nay." Motion carried. B4. (cont. from 6/27/95) 1221 & 1256 Bay Ave, 317, 323 & 325 Pinellas St, and 1225 Reynolds Ave, Westover Sub, Blk B, Lots 1-2 & 17, C. Perry Snell's Bluff View Court, Lots 22-24, and S.J. Reynolds Sub, Lot 8 (Morton Plant Hospital Association and Evmorphia M. Kralis) Z 95-02; LUP 95-13 LUP: From Residential/Office General to Institutional ZONE: From OL (Limited Office) to MPD (Master Planned Development) Member Mazur declared a conflict of interest with regard to this case. In a letter dated July 17, 1995, Emil Marquardt, requested a 30-day continuance to allow time to clarify certain aspects of the Morton Plant Master Plan. Member Keyes moved to continue Item B4 to the meeting of August 15, 1995. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Members Merriam, Keyes, Nixon, Carassas, Baron and Bickerstaffe voted "Aye"; Member Mazur abstained. Motion carried. C. Conditional Use Applications C1. LuVerne M. Loken, TRE to permit congregate care at 2780 Drew St, Sec 08-29-16, portion of M&B 34.04, zoned RM 16 (Residential Multiple Family). CU 95-46 Member Nixon declared a conflict of interest with regard to this case. Kenneth Burke and Ruth Phillips, representing the applicant, addressed the Board. Mr. Burke stated Mr. and Mrs. Phillips already operate two congregate care facilities in Palm Harbor. Due to their high quality care and excellent reputation, they are expanding to meet the needs of their new residents and referrals. They feel the proposed location near an elementary school and a nursing home is perfect for the project. He stated the operation will be a good neighbor and benefit the community. The facility will have space to serve up to 90 elderly people with everything but medical care. He stated 24 staff members will assist each 36 beds. He pointed out the request meets the standards for approval and requested favorable consideration. Questions were raised regarding the number of beds and the number of rooms. Mr. Burke responded the plan provides for ten private rooms with one bed each and 40 double rooms with two beds. He did not foresee many couples using the facility, stating residents would more likely be roommates. The rooms are not considered "units", as they consist of bath and sleeping quarters without kitchens. Discussion ensued regarding the parking calculations. Eight letters of support from doctors, professional guardians and customers were submitted as part of the application packet. No one was present to speak in support or opposition to the request. Member Keyes moved, concerning Item C1, to approve the conditional use as requested subject to the following conditions: 1) The requisite preliminary plat certification shall be obtained within one year of the date of this public hearing; 2) the requisite site plan certification shall be obtained within one year of the date of this public hearing; 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained prior to the start of construction, but no later than three months after the date of certification of the preliminary plat; and 4) the requisite certificate of occupancy shall be obtained within two years of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. Annexation, Zoning, Land Use Plan Amendment, Land Development Code Text Amendment and Local Planning Agency Review 1. Downtown Redevelopment Plan - Pete Gozza, CRA Executive Director. The City Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) retained a consulting group to prepare a Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Copies of the proposed plan were submitted for Board review. It was indicated such a plan must be reviewed for consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Gozza outlined the key points and displayed a map highlighting details of the proposed plan. He stressed the plan is still in the conceptual stage and is open to changes and suggestions. Mr. Gozza responded to questions regarding street layout, parking access and use density. Additional questions were raised regarding means of accessing the proposed bridge, Harborview Center and the Pinellas Trail. Mr. Gozza indicated this is a conceptual land use plan and the traffic patterns have not yet been addressed. Discussion ensued regarding placement of the Pinellas Trail, and building a hotel on the waterfront. One suggestion was to have a Coco Walk in Clearwater, similar to the one in Miami's Coconut Grove, which was proposed for Ybor City. Mr. Gozza stated in response to questions, they are considering condominiums and office buildings, with the tallest being 15 stories. Discussion ensued regarding development of a downtown lake and development of the surrounding property. A suggestion was made for the City Commission to first consider developing the lake and letting the market forces take over the commercial development. In response to a question, Mr. Gozza stated this is the last time the plan will be presented to the Planning and Zoning Board before it goes before the Commission. Mr. Gozza indicated the consultants will prepare an executive summary of the plan and provide a camera ready copy to the City. He stated staff has reviewed the plan for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and recommended endorsement to the City Commission. Member Keyes moved to endorse the Downtown Redevelopment Plan to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D2. 109 Meadow Lark Lane B, Bayview City Sub, Blk 2, Lots 1 & 2 and abutting alley to the South (Lisa A. Kadlec) A 95-14; LUP 95-16 LUP: Residential Urban ZONE: RS 8 (Single Family Residential) D3. 1531 Stevenson Drive, Stevenson's Heights Sub, Blk B, Lot 7 (Thomas L. Booth) A 95-15; LUP 95-17 LUP: Residential Low ZONE: RS 8 (Single Family Residential) D4. 412 Oakmount Road, Oakmount Sub, Lot 2 and abutting right-of-way (Fred O. Clark, Jr & Valerie P. Warren) A 95-17; LUP 95-19 LUP: Residential Low ZONE: RS 6 (Single Family Residential) D5. 1236 Kapok Circle, Kapok Forest, Lot 14 [Waldemar W. Sario & Lynn Hassell (Attorney-in-fact)] A 95-18; LUP 95-20 LUP: Residential Low ZONE: RS 6 (Single Family Residential) D6. 1238 Brookside Drive, Meadow Creek Sub, Blk C, Lot 10 (Roger K. & Gayle K. Coulter) A 95-19; LUP 95-21 LUP: Residential Low ZONE: RS 4 (Single Family Residential) No one was present to speak in support or opposition to Items D2 through D6. Member Mazur moved to endorse Items D2 through D6 to the City Commission, as requested. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D7. 1969 Sunset Point Road, Pinellas Groves Sub, SW 1/4, part of Lots 1& 2 (K.D. Sauder TRE & K.D. Sauder, Trust). Z 95-03 ZONE: From Neighborhood Commercial to General Commercial Ms. Glatthorn stated the applicant is requesting a less restrictive zoning to operate a beauty school. It was noted the application will not require a Future Land Use Plan amendment. Staff recommended endorsement. Member Keyes moved to endorse Item D7 to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D8. 705, 707, 709, & 711 Jasmine Way, Magnolia Park, Blk 31, Lots 2, 3, 4 & 5 (Rhoda S. Smolensky & Rosemary S. Kornreich). Z 95-04 ZONE: From Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial Planned Development Ms. Glatthorn gave the background of the case and presented, in writing, the staff recommendation. She stated the applicants purchased four lots adjacent to their approved Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF) and wish to incorporate these lots with the facility under a single site plan and zoning district. She said the applicants have plans for a new parking configuration and indicated a Future Land Use Plan amendment will not be required. Staff recommended endorsement subject to a declaration of Unity of Title. Pat Shaughnessy, representing the owner/applicants, responded to questions. He stated a walkway between buildings is a type of breezeway and a parking lot at the rear is being converted to green space. Mr. Shaughnessy complained air conditioning units are being stolen from the property under its current layout. Member Keyes moved to endorse Item D8 to the City Commission subject to a Unity of Title being recorded prior to the certification of the site plan. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. E. Chairman's Items - None F. Director's Items - None G. Board and Staff Comments Member Merriam requested clarification of the rules for speaking in rebuttal. Member Mazur requested an analysis of the parking requirements for elderly care facilities. Discussion resumed regarding the parking calculations in Item B1. H. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m.