CITY OF PINELLAS PARK
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
June 25, 2013
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. by Charles Murray, Chairperson, Board of
Adjustment.
PRESENT:
Charles Murray – Chairperson
Edward Kosinski – Vice Chair
Charles Wasson
James Hampson
William Holmes
Dean Braden
Robert Andolina
ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Amanda Clement, Zoning Analyst
Joe Aukstikalnis, Zoning Coordinator
James Denhardt, City Attorney
Melissa Thrumston, Zoning Staff Assistant
INVOCATION:
Mr. Kosinski
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
February 26, 2013 (no March meeting) and April 23, 2013
MOTION was made by Mr. Hampson and SECONDED by Mr. Wasson to APPROVE the minutes of
February 26, 2013.
Ayes: Charles Murray, Charles Wasson, James Hampson, William Holmes, Edward Kosinski, Dean
Braden, Robert Andolina
Nays: None
THE MOTION PASSED
MOTION was made by Mr. Kosinski and SECONDED by Mr. Holmes to APPROVE the minutes of April 23,
2013 with noted changes to page two in regards to increases to HOA dues where Mr. Andolina served on
the Lake Seminole Village Home Owners Association.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Ayes: Charles Murray, Charles Wasson, James Hampson, William Holmes, Edward Kosinski, Dean
Braden, Robert Andolina
Nays: None
THE MOTION CARRIED
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
1.
CASE NO.: BOA 2013-24 (QUASI JUDICIAL)
REQUEST: Consideration of a request for a variance to reduce the west side yard setback from 25
feet to 8 feet for the construction of a freestanding garage.
LOCATION: 6070 94th Avenue
QUASI – JUDICIAL
Mr. Murray – Read the rules and procedures for the Board of Adjustment.
Ms. Thrumston – Swore in anyone speaking on the request before the Board.
QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD
Mr. Murray – I have a question. The assistant City Manager suggested that the property owner may want to
consider rezoning to RR, what benefit would that have been to the situation we are looking at tonight?
Ms. Clement – Pertaining to this situation I don’t know that there would be a benefit because the side yard
set backs for RR are still greater than what he is requested for the construction of the garage.
PROPONENTS
Mr. William Scott Nelms – I am the property owner of 6070 94th Avenue North. I have been sworn. We
bought the property in January this year. It is our primary residence. (Pictures distributed and submitted into
evidence). The primary purpose for the eight foot set back is there was a nice paver driveway installed by
the investors that sold us the house that basically comes all the way around the whole front of the house.
You can see by the pictures I furnished you that there is a fountain in the middle of it. We were hoping to be
able to put in a garage that would not require us to pull up the pavers and start over again. I have a second
picture that shows between the two lots, the lot next to us there’s a single family rental home in the front
and it’s a boarding stable and ranch. I don’t know how many acres maybe five acres at least. The third
picture is from our bedroom window looking out to the property there and it is primarily what I would call
“Farm” type property. I also have an engineer set of plans. I would be happy to get one or two copies for
you to keep. The garage is designed to basically blend with the house. It would be stucco and the same tile
roof in the front of it. It would sit about thirteen feet from the house.
I do have a letter from the owner that would be the closest. He had no problem with it. Keith Johnson, Park
Ranch, LLC was the owner I found for that property.
Mr. Murray – That’s to the east or west of you?
Mr. William Scott Nelms – It is to the west side. He owns that property. He leases the house in the front to a
residential tenant. We talked to him and he had no problem. In the back is a woman running a boarding
ranch and she had no problem.
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)
Mr. Hampson – I would imagine you are going to want to put electrical in the garage.
Mr. William Scott Nelms – Yes.
Mr. Hampson – And then mechanical, plumbing?
Mr. William Scott Nelms – No Plumbing just electrical.
Mr. Austikalnis informed the Board that “mechanical”, per the Building Code, referred to an air conditioning
unit or a heating device.
Mr. Hampson – So, for your case just electrical.
Mr. William Scott Nelms – Yes. Concrete block, stucco, tile roof designed to basically be painted to match
the house.
Mr. Andolina – You did say the driveway was there when you purchased the property?
Mr. William Scott Nelms – Yes. We are doing a remodeling now that is permitted. Your inspectors have
been out there more than a dozen times in the last six weeks.
Mr. Murray – You will have to add some to the driveway won’t you?
Mr. William Scott Nelms – Only to fill in.
Discussion on adding onto to existing driveway and property dimensions.
Mr. Murray – The driveway that is not paved, you’re not going to use that one?
Mr. William Scott Nelms – No.
OPPONENTS
None
MOTION was made by Mr. Andolina and SECONDED by Mr. Holmes to APPROVE case number BOA
2013-24 subject to the following conditions:
1. The freestanding garage shall have a west side yard setback of eight feet.
2. The variance is for the freestanding garage only.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Ayes: Charles Murray, Charles Wasson, Edward Kosinski, William Holmes, James Hampson, Dean
Braden, Robert Andolina
Nays: None
THE MOTION CARRIED
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
2.
CASE NO.: BOA 2013-25 (QUASI JUDICIAL)
REQUEST: Consideration of a request for a variance to increase the maximum lot coverage
(impervious surface ratio) from 78% to 81% to increase the parking area.
LOCATION: 9375 66th Street North
QUASI – JUDICIAL
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
Mr. Hampson – Could you explain the comments from Community Planning about the flood zone “X”? I
don’t fully understand what that is.
Mr. Aukstikalnis – What they are saying is that there are flood maps that are revised every number of
years, and basically on the site plan they referenced the wrong flood information by listing the wrong
panels. So, the Planning Division was only noting the panel number had changed. It is informational only. It
does not impact anything we are looking at this evening.
Mr. Murray – The current coverage is now 78%, which is greater than the Code allows. So, it already
exceeds?
Ms. Clement – Yes.
PROPONENTS
Albert Carrier – I am with Deuel & Associates, we’re the Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors for this
project. I have been sworn in. I have, with me, Dr. John Wachter, he is the resident doctor at the site. He is
here to answer any questions you may have regarding this facility.
Dr. John Wachter - I have been sworn in as well.
Mr. Albert Carrier – We were here three or four years ago and they approved the additional parking spaces
up front. What we had planned on doing is putting in pervious concrete. In forming the parking spaces
around the trees, we did not want to impact any existing trees that were there. We got the approval from
you all and we went to move forward with getting the SWFWMD permit, and at that time we did get the
approval from SWFWMD.
Originally this site, when it was vacant with the adjacent site where the Dollar General sits on, was all
permitted at one time for storm water. The Eye Associates site was then developed and they retained an
easement for the overall parcel to receive their drainage. Years went by and nothing happened on the
Dollar General site, and we applied for the permit from SWFWMD to get the permit. The only comment we
got was that the pond had not been maintained, and they wanted us to get the owner of the adjacent
property to fix his pond. We made several phone calls and got no where. So, we withdrew the permit letting
them know that they were not SWFWMD’s enforcement and put the clean up enforcement back on
SWFWMD. They would not give us the permit.
Back in July, I imagine Dollar General came in and revised their drainage calculations. At the same time, in
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)
July of 2012 I got a call saying you got the permit for the Eye Associates. So the only thing I can think of is
that SWFWMD must have revisited knowing that Dollar General was going to come in and clean up the
pond. So, we do have a permit basically saying we can build the Eye Associates extra parking as planned.
Mr. Murray – The proposed parking spots that are shadowed in are the proposed new parking spaces?
Mr. Albert Carrier – Yes.
Mr. Murray – Where is that in relationship to the buffer that is there? Grass? Trees?
Mr. Albert Carrier – There is a sidewalk, I believe its dimensions are on your site plans, approximately five
feet behind the sidewalk. It may be closer to eight feet behind the back of the sidewalk. The sidewalk is
approximately two feet off of the property line. I’m estimating here a five to seven foot additional grass strip
before you get to the face of the additional parking spaces.
Mr. Andolina – I visited the site and the spot that was whitened out where there is no parking spot there is a
nice oak there. That is going to remain, correct?
Mr. Albert Carrier – Yes. We are putting in pervious concrete at grade. We are grading everything back on
to the site, so it gets collected into the existing storm water system. The reason we want to put the pervious
concrete at grade is because we don’t want to impact any resistance to the trees.
Mr. Murray – How will that affect the garbage pick up?
Mr. Albert Carrier – In order to get an additional parking space - in the lower right hand corner of the site
plan there is a diagonal space; the dumpster used to sit in that location and the solid waste company had
requested to have it moved because he was having a hard time maneuvering. So, the dumpster has been
moved off of that diagonal pad and it is sitting basically where it is today. In doing so, we are going to turn
that diagonal pad into an additional parking space.
Discussion held on the distance from parking spaces to 66th St.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Mr. Kosinski – When this came before us before, I understood they were putting in the turf block in place of
concrete, so the water could drain through and there would be percolation in that area for the tree roots.
Now I understand they are putting in crushed concrete in there?
Dr. John Wachter – If I remember it at the time we had discussed one or the other, I think you preferred the
turf block. My problem is that most of my patients have walkers and canes. My concern was, if they were to
park there, and were going to come out with a walker or a cane, that they would fall.
Mr. Albert Carrier – We are putting in pervious concrete, which is 50% pervious pavement. In a
demonstration you can take a five gallon bucket and pour it right into the concrete and it goes right into the
ground. Another reason we are not digging out and putting any type of sub base, we want that to permeate
into the ground, so we are just putting the pervious concrete onto existing grade.
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)
OPPONENTS
None
MOTION was made by Mr. Wasson and SECONDED by Mr. Holmes to APPROVE case number BOA
2013-25 subject to the following conditions:
1. The maximum lot coverage (impervious surface ratio) for the subject parcel shall be increased
from 78% to 81%.
2. Applicant shall provide proof that the storm water retention for this site was designed to
accommodate 81% impervious surface (during site plan review/permitting) or provide
additional retention, if applicable.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Ayes: Charles Murray, Charles Wasson, Edward Kosinski, William Holmes, James Hampson, Dean
Braden, Robert Andolina
Nays: None
THE MOTION CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS
None
GENERAL BUSINESS
None
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION was made by Mr. Wasson and SECONDED by Mr. Kosinski to ADJOURN the meeting.
Meeting adjourned at approximately 7:36 p.m.
_____________________________________________
Charles Murray, Chairperson
BOA 6.25.13 Meeting Minutes (In progress)