Loading...
04/01/1997PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER April 1, 1997 Present: Edward Mazur Brenda Harris Nixon Kemper Merriam Robert D. Bickerstaffe Bernie Baron Frank Kunnen Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member   Leslie Dougall-Sides Sandy Glatthorn Lou Hilton Etim Udoh Gwen Legters Assistant City Attorney Planning Manager Senior Planner Associate Planner Board Reporter   Absent: Douglas Hilkert Board Member   The meeting was called to order at 2:05 p.m. in Harborview Center Ballroom A, followed by the invocation, meeting procedures and the appeal process. To provide continuity for research, items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Minutes Approval -- March 18, 1997 The board approved the minutes as submitted in writing to each member by the Board Reporter. C. Conditional Uses C1. Pick Kwik Food Stores, Inc./El-Amir of Tampa Co./Jerry H. & James H. Center (Happy Foods) to permit package sales of beer and wine (change of business ownership) at 2099 North Highland Avenue, Sec 02-29-15, M&B 21.05, zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial). CU 97-15 This item was moved to the end of the agenda to allow time for the applicant or a representative to arrive. Mr. Hilton presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the request seems appropriate and should not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff recommended approval with one standard condition. Anwar Hasan introduced and spoke for the applicant, Tarek Zein-E-Eding, who does not speak English. He agreed with staff’s analysis of the proposal. No verbal or written support or opposition was expressed. Member Merriam moved to approve Item C1, CU 97-15, subject to the following condition: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite building permit, certificate of occupancy and occupational license within six months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C2. Equator, Inc./Tiffany Wilder Butler/BTLS Entertainment, Inc. (Planet Bubba) to permit nightclubs, taverns, and bars (change of business ownership at 2516 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Studebaker's Sub, Lot 2, zoned CG (General Commercial). CU 97-16 Mr. Hilton presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant proposes a nightclub on property abutting a church to the north. He reviewed a lengthy history of short-lived nightclub uses on the subject property. Staff felt a nightclub is compatible with the surrounding area, provided certain performance requirements are met as conditions of approval. He noted the previous nightclubs have never had enough parking and requirements have never been met. A parking variance or alternate parking arrangement will be necessary. A parking agreement on the adjacent Florida Power easement was suggested as an alternative. The applicant has informed staff they were working on obtaining a parking agreement with Florida Power, but no record exists of such an agreement, or of variances having been obtained. One member requested amendment of condition #2 to indicate activities that “result in violation of” the public nudity or adult use ordinances are not permitted. It was indicated a scheduled contest might not violate code, but the resulting activities might. Condition #7 was amended to indicate the parking lot will be policed “continuously” from 10:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Ms. Glatthorn clarified a discrepancy in the number of parking spaces listed in the staff report, stating 60 spaces are provided by deed with the Tampa Tribune building, for a total of 266 existing parking spaces. In response to questions, Mr. Hilton reviewed a chronology of six previous nightclubs at this site: Studebaker’s, Pattemore’s, Makos, Equator, Calypso Bay, and Jamz & Java. All were before the board for alcoholic beverage sales approval. He stressed the parking requirement must be met before the occupational license is issued. Tom Long, attorney representing the applicant, related the historical use of the property as a nightclub. Tiffany Wilder Butler owns the 4COP-SRX liquor license that allows both a restaurant and a club. The applicant agrees with staff recommendations, and the amendments requested by the board. Mr. Long said the applicant is in conformance with the parking requirement by virtue of their existing license allowing operation as a restaurant. The architect has calculated the parking requirements for a restaurant at 172 spaces, so the existing 266 spaces are more than adequate. Florida Power has been contacted for additional parking, but Mr. Long said he was told by a Florida Power representative that filing the agreement is a 45-day process and the cost is negotiable, but substantial, possibly as much as $5,000 per month. He was not able to determine prior to today’s hearing whether any of the previous businesses had parking agreements with Florida Power. Mr. Long said Ms. Wilder has been in contact with the adjacent church about their concerns, and wishes to do everything possible to alleviate those concerns. Mr. Long stressed the historic use as a nightclub and felt a restaurant and nightclub should be allowed to continue. He indicated Todd Clem, known on local radio as “Bubba the Love Sponge,” is a minority owner in the corporation. Mr. Clem is using his radio pseudonym as a marketing tool to promote the business. Mr. Long asked the board to separate the businessman and club owner from the radio personality, because the applicants have no intention of violating the nudity ordinance and will comply with all regulations. In response to questions, Mr. Long said he did not represent the applicants in the previous conditional use hearings, but has read the files. He felt calculation of parking by restaurant standards is appropriate because the chef will push food sales. He expressed concern with the discrepancy between State and City parking calculations related to alcoholic beverage uses. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding whether the proposed business qualifies as a restaurant or a nightclub, for the purpose of calculating parking requirements. Mr. Hilton reiterated the subject property has never had a parking agreement with Florida Power. Discussion ensued regarding other alternative parking arrangements, including cross parking agreements with the surroundings businesses. Mr. Long said the club still intends to have valet parking. Tiffany Wilder stated she had a parking agreement with Florida Power eight years ago, for $150 per month. She said $5,000 per month for parking was a shock, but she would do whatever is necessary to satisfy parking requirements, and relieve church concerns. She had a good relationship with the church during the eight months she had operated one of the previous businesses. She did not favor a parking agreement with Sam’s Club across the street, because of the danger to pedestrians crossing heavy traffic on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. General Manager Patrick Franke stated he has operated clubs for the past 12 years, and has never run a “skin” club. He will not permit wet T-shirt contests or similar activities. He is working hard to put in the restaurant and a cigar room selling high-priced cigars and cognac. He spoke with a church representative who had indicated a prejudice because of the “Bubba” name. Mr. Franke blamed the management for the code violation problems at Jamminz’, stating it is the management, not the DJ, who is in control. In response to a question, he said the attraction will be the great menu, the trendy cigar room, and the music and dancing. Bubba’s participation will be minimal, limited to bringing his ideas, promoting the club, and showing off his celebrity acquaintances. Robert Gregg said he has been the club’s architect since it was Pattemore’s. He highlighted the parking history of the site, stressing he was never told until 2 days ago the parking requirement exceeded 172. He related his understanding of the past and current City parking requirements, stating he has intentionally limited the club’s seating capacity to 960, although the space could hold 1,200 patrons. He spoke at length regarding his recommendations for use of the indoor areas, how the porch came to be enclosed, and noting the applicant is allowed reasonable use of the land. He did not remember parking requirements being imposed on Pattemore’s or Mako’s, or any previous management indicating the need to deal with Florida Power for parking. One member clarified it was never suggested that an agreement with Florida Power was the only alternative, and each applicant had understood the requirement for additional parking. Discussion continued regarding the code definition of the establishment as a restaurant or nightclub in terms of percentage of food sales, parking requirements, and floor space usage. For the purpose of determining the parking requirement, a question was posed individually to Mr. Long, Ms. Wilder, and Mr. Franke, whether the applicants intend to operate the business as a nightclub at any time during the week. Mr. Long, Ms. Wilder, and Mr. Franke responded affirmatively. Mr. Gregg did not give a definitive response. Eight people spoke in opposition to the request. Concerns were cited as follows by priests and members of the parish counsel for Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church, church members and school members: 1) The church has a valid lease agreement for parking on the Florida Power easement; 2) The church does not consent to sublease parking to anyone due to the frequency of weekday, evening and weekend church and school events; 3) Providing parking based on restaurant calculations when the application is for nightclub/taverns and bars; 4) Lack of harmony with the past neighbors; 5) increased trash and debris on the site; 6) Being asked to put aside consideration of Mr. Clem’s marketing personality in view of the events at Jamminz’; 7) Inappropriatene s of a nightclub next to a church and school; 8) Parents pick up their children from the Greek school during the same time that most clubs hold happy hours; 9) The negative moral and financial impact of the club has wreaked havoc on the church organization; 10) Expenses incurred from cleaning debris and towing vehicles from the church property; 11) Rude and negative comments to parishioners during outdoor religious ceremonies from people waiting outside the club; 12) The dichotomy of allowing a nightclub next door to an ethnic church that is the center of life for Greek Orthodox people; 13) the manager has mentioned in writing that swimwear calendar contests and male reviews will be conducted; 14) The police department has been celled 67 times since 1994 for various reasons including parking and trespass; 15) It should not be the responsibility of the parish priests to get up at 3:00 a.m. to attend police calls; 16) A great number of youth group activities extend into the evening when children can witness the scene outside the club while they are waiting for their transportation; 17) Concern that Bubba’s public persona, his following, and reputation cannot be separated from his role as a businessman, when it is these characteristics that will attract patrons to the club; 18) Florida Power had been reluctant to enter an agreement for parking on their easement because heavy nightclub traffic had caused severe erosion of the drive aisles in the past; 19) The nightclub is not a good example of the values, morals, and importance of God as taught by the church; 20) The board is responsible for protecting the church and school from the nightclub’s example; 21) The appearance that no one cares what happens to the City of Clearwater, when it is promoted as being a nice, clean city that focuses on family values; 22) The Mayor has indicated the City does not need this kind of business; and 23) A question how enforcement will be handled if the club does not live up to the conditions of approval. The parish counsel president read into the record a petition reiterating many of the above concerns. The petition contained the signatures of over 600 parishioners. Discussion resumed regarding the parking agreement on the Florida Power easement. A question was raised why the church did not bring up the parking issue during previous conditional use hearings. Discussion ensued regarding days and hours of worship services and other activities; proximity of those events to the nightclub operation; whether the application would be more acceptable to the church if the applicants agreed to build a tasteful barrier between the two properties; the church and nightclub have existed next door to each other for a long time; the difference between a church wedding party and regular nightclub operations when both engage in eating, drinking and dancing as part of their festivities; Mr. Franke and Ms. Wilder spoke in rebuttal to the opposition. They reiterated their willingness to be a good neighbor and prohibit the inappropriate activities with which Bubba was associated in the past. They offered to share parking and keep patrons from using the church parking lot; openly communicate with the church; with advance notice, to close the business and provide parking lot security during outdoor religious ceremonies and children’s activities. Mr. Franke said he lives 10 minutes away from the club and offered to be available 24 hours a day to respond to any problems in person. He responded to questions about his nightclub management experience, stating the average life span of a club is about three years because new clubs open and the crowd moves on. That is the reason the emphasis is being placed on the restaurant. Ms. Wilder said a wall will separate the restaurant from the nightclub, which will not open until 9:00 p.m., after the time when most children are out. She acknowledged the church is against the sale of alcoholic beverages, but pointed out a liquor license goes with the property. She did not feel the club would need overflow parking until after 11:00 p.m., and was willing to work diligently to resolve any conflicts. Three members of the opposition spoke in rebuttal to the supporters. A question was raised if Bubba had been prohibited by the City Commission from appearing at Jamminz’. Discussion ensued regarding the circumstances involved the recent change of ownership at Jamminz’. Staff stated and Ms. Dougall-Sides verified, at no time did the Planning and Zoning Board prohibit Mr. Clem from being involved with the Jamminz’ property. Church members felt, while management’s intentions are good, the patrons’ behavior outside and what Bubba does are beyond the club’s control. One church member referred to documents in his possession relating to two Florida Power easements; one for a 10-foot utility easement in 1988, the other for a parking agreement with the church signed in 1993. The documents were not submitted for the record. The church treasurer stated he executed the 1993 agreement with Florida Power and continues to pay rent. It was not known if the parking agreement is exclusive. In closing, Mr. Long reiterated his remarks regarding the historical and consistent use of the subject property. He noted the applicant is not asking for a new license. While he did not know who arrived first, he stated the issue of the church having purchased property next door to a nightclub should not be a factor in the board’s decision. He asked the board to impose the conditions they felt would make the club compatible with its surroundings. He said the applicant wants to cooperate. He listed other establishments in the area that are not consistent with a church or school use. He stated he has learned the agreement with Florida Power is terminable within 30 days. Mr. Long asked the board to 1) allow 60 days for him to obtain concurrent use approval, and 2) to consider how to blend the restaurant and club uses into a business that is compatible with the surroundings. The public hearing was closed and board discussion ensued. One member stated it is the applicants’ responsibility to comply with the 500 foot separation distance from the church and school. One member stated there is no doubt the church and nightclub are incompatible; there can be no comparison of a church wedding to the types of activities conducted in a nightclub; and it is clear there is a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Discussion ensued regarding how the subject property will be used. Ms. Dougall-Sides noted the applicant characterized their application as a restaurant/nightclub. Staff listed the application under the nightclubs/taverns and bars zoning category. She said the applicant would not need board approval to transfer the use as a restaurant without alcoholic beverage sales. She stated the number of parking spaces required for a restaurant, nightclub, or both, is a site plan issue and will come up in the context of the occupational license application. The recommended condition for the applicant to meet parking requirements or obtain a parking variance is sufficient for the Planning and Zoning Board’s purposes. In response to a question, Ms. Dougall-Sides stated that staff’s interpretation of the required number of parking spaces is in the record. The board does not need to stipulate the required number of spaces, only that the parking requirement must be met. Board discussion continued. One member suggested for the church to issue parking stickers for parishioners’ cars. It was felt this property has historically become a problem every time the people who run the business try to make it into something that is not compatible with the church and City standards. While testimony had indicated that club management had encouraged the inappropriate activities that had occurred while Bubba was a DJ on Clearwater beach, it was felt people cannot be encouraged to do something they are not already inclined to do. It was indicated the subject use is not totally incompatible with the surroundings due to the presence of an adult use bar across the street. While concerned that ensuring strict compliance overburdens police department resources, it was felt approval with a nine month trial period would be acceptable if the debris is cleaned up and the nightclub does not open until 9:00 p.m. One member questioned, if board members cannot vote for a nightclub, whether readvertising would have to take place to allow use of the property as a restaurant with limited entertainment. Discussion ensued regarding floor area ratio and other code requirements. Ms. Glatthorn stated a restaurant selling alcoholic beverages within 200 feet of a church or school requires conditional use approval. Ms. Dougall-Sides stated the board needs to vote on this application for nightclubs/taverns and bars, or continue the item. Rephrasing the question, the board member inquired whether an application for conditional use approval of a restaurant selling alcoholic beverages within 200 feet of a church or school, could also address allowing live entertainment. Ms. Glatthorn responded affirmatively. One member stressed the board’s decision must be made based on the code, not personalities. By approving with conditions, the board makes it possible for businesses to raise their standards and improve conditions in the community. The compatibility problems can be solved by strict law enforcement, and cooperation of businesses and the community to adhere to the standards. Support of the business was encouraged because entertainment is needed in the community. He noted even a baseball park can disturb surrounding residents during peak season. He advocated allowing the proposed business to proceed, requiring strict adherence to the standards and conditions of approval, giving them a chance to set an example of how a restaurant, nightclub and bar can operate harmoniously in a family-oriented community. Member Bickerstaffe moved to approve Item C2, CU 97-16, subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite building permit, certificate of occupancy and occupational license within 6 months of the date of this public hearing; 2) The applicant shall neither promote nor permit on the premises any live entertainment, competitions, contests, or any other activities that result in the violation of the public nudity or adult use regulation ordinances (Section 21.13, Code of Ordinances, and Section 41.601, Code of Ordinances, respectively). In particular, the applicant shall neither promote nor permit “wet T-shirt contests” or similar activities on the premises; 3) There shall be no outdoor entertainment; 4) The sale of alcoholic beverages shall be limited to consumption on premises with no package sales; 5) A landscape plan for all parking lots shall be submitted to Environmental Management for approval and the required landscaping shall be installed prior to the issuance of the requisite occupational license; 6) Prior to the issuance of the requisite occupational license and opening of the business, the applicant shall meet the parking requirement or obtain a variance; 7) A minimum of two security personnel shall be provided to continuously police the parking lot between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights; these security personnel shall spend their time in the parking lot, not in the operation of the restaurant, bar or nightclub; 8) This approval shall be for a nine month trial period from the date of issuance of the occupational license, after which the application will be reviewed for compliance with the established conditions of approval; and 9) The parking lot and all areas outside the building are to be kept clean and clear of litter and debris at all times, especially after an evening of business. The motion was duly seconded. Members Nixon and Bickerstaffe voted "Aye"; Members Mazur, Merriam, Baron, and Kunnen voted "Nay." Motion failed. Member Baron moved to deny Item C2, CU 97-16. The motion was duly seconded. Discussion ensued regarding whether a different motion to approve, or a motion to deny, was needed. One member strongly objected that a second motion is not needed unless the intent is to approve something different than was stated in the first motion. Member Baron withdrew his motion. The seconder concurred. Discussion continued. Ms. Dougall-Sides clarified there was essentially no action taken because the motion to approve had failed. Discussion ensued regarding what the applicant will be allowed to do if today’s conditional use is not approved. It was indicated the restaurant could continue to operate without alcoholic beverages, or the applicant could file a new application if the establishment is found to be located within 200 feet of a church or school. One member spoke against denial, encouraging the board to seek a harmonious solution; to give the business a chance to operate according to the conditions of approval; and to charge the City with strictly enforcing its rules to ensure the business does not negatively impact its surroundings. Member Kunnen moved to deny Item C2, CU 97-16. The motion was duly seconded. Members Mazur, Merriam, Baron, and Kunnen voted "Aye"; Members Nixon and Bickerstaffe voted "Nay." Motion carried. C3. A.P. Mar Corp. (Portvue Motel/Reel Easy) to permit Marina facilities (charter boat) at 101 Coronado Drive, City Park Sub, Part of Water Lot 1, zoned CR 28 (Resort Commercial) & P (Preservation). CU 97-17 Mr. Hilton presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant is seeking conditional use approval for a charter fishing boat with a capacity of six passengers. The proposed fishing charter business, Reel Easy, will be located adjacent to the Port Vue Hotel, and will serve guests of the Port Vue and the Days Inn hotel. Mr. Hilton outlined hours of operation and required parking spaces, stating request seems appropriate and should not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff recommended approval with two conditions. Antonios Markopoulos, the owner/applicant, agreed with staff’s analysis and the proposed conditions. In response to questions, he said four commercial boat slips, and ten non-commercial boat slips currently exist at the motel. He named the boats currently docked at the facility. One resident within 500 feet of the proposal, spoke in opposition to the request. She did not object to boating or fishing, as she and her family boat and fish, but she strongly objected to conditional use approval of a commercial venture on this side of the harbor for the following reasons: 1) this side of the harbor is primarily residential, with only two commercial enterprises; 2) an ample number of charter and other commercial boat operations exist elsewhere to satisfy the demand; 3) car traffic is very heavy in the vicinity; 4) the backout parking beneath the Portvue Motel creates danger and obstructs traffic flow on adjacent Gulfview Boulevard and Devon Drive; 5) strong environmental concerns that heavy oil slicks and discharge of diesel fuel into the harbor are killing the grass flats in front of her house, the smell of diesel fumes is overwhelming, and silt has accreted in the channel due to the increasing amount of boat traffic; and 6)  noise from the engines and loudspeakers on commercial vessels in the harbor has increased. Mr. Markopoulos responded to the opposition, reiterating the boat slips already exist at his motels, and he did not understand why a boat should bother anyone. In response to questions, he indicated on a map which slip he will designate for docking the charter boat. He owns both the above referenced motels, and the boat slips are for the use of his tenants. Brief discussion ensued regarding the parking space requirement. Mr. Markopoulos stated he understands staff’s recommended conditions of approval, and will have a licensed boat captain to operate the charter operation. Member Baron moved to approve Item C3, CU 97-17, subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall obtain the requisite occupational license within 6 months of the date of this public hearing; and 2) The vessel must have a licensed captain as required by the City’s Harbormaster. 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 D1. 804 Pinellas Street, Milton Park Sub, Blk 10, Lots 10-12. (Word of Faith Church of God, Inc. and Francis J. & Kristin R. Feraro) Z 97-02 Zone: OL (Limited Office) Mr. Udoh presented background information and written staff recommendations, stating the applicant is seeking rezoning to Office Planned Development (OPD.) It was indicated the adjacent lots 6 through 9 were approved in a separate rezoning request (Z 97-01, LUP 97-01; 3/4/97), because of an associated land use plan amendment. Staff recommended endorsement because the current request is consistent with the character of the existing professional office facilities in the area. Richard Uline, realty agent representing the applicant, stated the subject property has been on the market for some time, but has not sold because there does not seem to be a need for a church at this location. The lots are being placed under contract for purchase by the owner of the adjacent Thompson Executive Center, for use as professional offices. Bob Thompson, executive center owner, explained the purpose of the proposed rezoning to extend his office complex eastward across Myrtle Avenue. A comprehensive land use plan change for the subject lots will take place in June, 1997. Afterwards, he plans to proceed with construction as soon as the requisite permits are obtained. Member Nixon moved to endorse Item D1, Z 97-02, to the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Board and Staff Comments In response to a question from Member Mazur, Mr. Hilton said he hoped the Land Development Code update will be ready for board review by the end of May. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.