Pinellas County Florida Banner
File #: 23-1418A    Version: 1
Type: Zoning / Land Use and Related Item Status: Public Hearing
File created: 9/8/2023 Department: Board of County Commissioners
On agenda: 10/31/2023 Final action:
Title: Variance request from Kelly Lee McFrederick and Jack Rice to the County Code of Ordinances for docking facilities at 3612 East Maritana Drive, St. Pete Beach.
Attachments: 1. Corres to Asst County Attorney Mackesey, 2. Maritana BCC Order - Letterhead, 3. Variance Request, 4. Project Location Map, 5. Correspondence - In Support, 6. Opposition Email 060723, 7. April 2018 E-Mail re Use of Original Structure, 8. Historic Designation Application to City, 9. Letter in support, 10. Maritana -- County Staff Response, 11. McFrederick_Rice Variance Hearing BCC Presentation, 12. Voicemail in support, 13. Original Variance App Maritana Dr 112321, 14. 10312023 Presentation 23-1418A, 15. 13 Comment Cards
Related files: 22-0090A

Subject:

Title

Variance request from Kelly Lee McFrederick and Jack Rice to the County Code of Ordinances for docking facilities at 3612 East Maritana Drive, St. Pete Beach.

label

 

Recommended Action:

Recommended Action

Recommend the denial of the requested Variance from Kelly Lee McFrederick and Jack Rice (Property Owners) to the County Code of Ordinances for docking facilities at 3612 East Maritana Drive, St. Pete Beach (Subject Address).

 

                     Property Owners applied for a dock permit to add to existing docking facilities at the Subject Address.

                     County Water and Navigation staff (Staff) determined that the previous owners created a non-conformity on the property in 2018 when they failed to remove the tie poles as required by Permit P48100-18. This created three mooring areas, or “slips”, in violation of Section 58-555(a)(5).

                     Property Owners are requesting a variance to County Code Section 58-555(a)(5) to keep all three slips, which Staff recommend denying. 

                     If the Variance to Section 58-555(a)(5) is granted, then no further action by the Board is required.

                     If the Variance to Section 58-555(a)(5) is denied, then Staff requires that one of the two roofed slips be permanently blocked off, thereby preventing its use as a functional slip. 

                     Although effectively blocking off one of the roofed slips will achieve compliance with Section 58-555(a)(5), it would also create a non-conformity with 58-543(m), which only allows functional slips to have roofs. Consequently, a Variance to 58-543(m) would be required for the roof over the blocked off, non-functional, slip to remain.

                     In the event a Variance to Section 58-543(m) is needed, Staff recommend approval with the condition that the Property Owners comply with Section 58-544 (dock repair and reconstruction) in the future.

Body

 

Strategic Plan:

Ensure Public Health, Safety, and Welfare

Practice Superior Environmental Stewardship
3.3 Protect and improve the quality of our water, air, and other natural resources.

 

Summary:

Summary

The Board is authorized to hear this Variance Request under Section 58-539(a) of the Code.

Section 58-555(a)(5) states that a dock may accommodate no more than two (2) vessels for permanent mooring. This provision of County code is identical to state dock permitting requirements. The Property Owners are requesting a variance to Section 58-555(a)(5) to keep the current three (3) slips, two of which are roofed, at the Subject Address in their present condition.  A variance is required to keep more than two (2) boat slips under County code. If the Variance is denied, which Staff recommends, then one (1) of the two (2) roofed slips will be required to be permanently blocked off or removed, thereby preventing its use as a functional slip.

This section of County Code is consistent with state laws 62-330.427(1)(a)(1), F.A.C., as well as the Army Corps Programmatic General Permit SAJ-96. Pinellas County Water and Navigation is authorized by the United States Army Corps of Engineers through a Local Operating Agreement to regulate private single-family piers and appurtenances in navigable waters located within Pinellas County, pursuant to Programmatic General Permit SAJ-96.  The stipulations of SAJ-96 mandate private single-family piers not to exceed 2 boat slips.

Although effectively blocking off one (1) of the roofed slips will achieve compliance with Section 58-555(a)(5), it would also create a non-conformity with Section 58-543(m), which only allows functional slips to have roofs.  Consequently, a Variance to 58-543(m) would be required for the roof over the blocked off, non-functional, slip to remain.

Accordingly, if the Variance to 58-555(a)(5) is granted to keep all three (3) slips, the roofing covering all slips may remain.

In the event a Variance to 58-543(m) is needed to allow a roof to remain over a non-functional slip, Staff recommend approval with the condition that the Property Owners comply with Section 58-544 (Dock Repair and Reconstruction) in the future. 

Body

 

Background Information:

Around 1940 and prior to County dock permitting, a boat dock which included a roof over the structure was constructed on the subject property.  The roof originally covered one slip (First Slip) as well as the decking. Permits for repairs and minor modifications were first authorized by the County in 1988 and again in 1991.

In 2013, a previous owner submitted a County dock permit application to install six tie poles south of the First Slip.  The permit application was approved, and the second slip was installed (Second Slip).

In 2018, the prior owner submitted a permit application to install a roofed boatlift to the north of the First Slip.  The drawing in the application did not show the Second Slip (six tie poles south of the original structure) - a violation of Section 58-550(e)(7)b.5 of the Code (all existing structures must be shown on the permit drawing).  More importantly, because the Second Slip was not shown on the drawing, County Staff reasonably assumed that the Second Slip was being removed.  The permit application was approved as depicted, and the roofed boatlift was installed, creating a Third Slip.  If the drawing in the application had shown all three slips, Staff would have denied the permit application, as it is inconsistent with Section 58-555(a)(5); docks may accommodate no more than two vessels for permanent mooring.

In May 2021, the current Property Owners submitted a permit application for a floating dock to the east of the First Slip.  As part of the application review process, Staff inspected the Property and discovered the discrepancies described in the paragraph above.  Staff engaged the Property Owners and proposed several alternatives to reduce the number of slips. However, none of the County’s alternatives were accepted. The Property Owners retained counsel to negotiate resolution of this matter and ultimately filed this Variance Request.

In November 2021, the City of St. Pete Beach approved an application submitted by the Property Owners to designate the original structure, which includes the First Slip, as a historic structure.

 

Fiscal Impact:

N/A

 

Staff Member Responsible:

Kelli Hammer Levy, Director, Public Works

 

Partners:

City of St. Pete Beach

 

Attachments:

Variance Request
Project Location Map
Opposition Email 060723
April 2018 E-Mail re Use of Original Structure
Historic Designation Application to City
Letter in Support
Maritana - County Staff Response
McFrederick_Rice Variance Hearing BCC Presentation
Voicemail in support