Redington Shores Weighs Variance Process After Staircase Cases

REDINGTON SHORES — Town officials want to make sure property owners aren't blindsided when seeking zoning variances.

Town commissioners asked staff at a July 29 workshop to review the town's variance process and suggest ways to give applicants earlier and clearer warnings when their requests are likely to be denied.

The discussion stemmed from a variance case involving property owner Danny Pownall.

Pownall told commissioners on July 8 he spent months working with town staff, engineers and contractors throughout the planning process for elevating his hurricane-damaged triplex.

Days before his hearing before a special magistrate, though, he learned staff had recommended denying the variances his project required.

"It's a valid question," Town Manager Margaret Carey said. “I was kind of wondering about that myself. Like, is there some point early on where you could say, ‘You are not going to be able to prove a hardship here. And this is ultimately going to cost you $750 and a lot of time. And maybe you shouldn't do this.’ “

A variance allows a property owner to deviate from a zoning rule. To receive one, applicants must show the hardship is caused by the land itself, not the building or other factors.

The Pinellas Current first reported the issue last month. The story examined Pownall's variance case and a similar one involving another property owner — bringing attention to conflicts between elevated-home projects and the decades-old setback rules.

“When you elevate homes, things don't fit in the same square,” town planner Dave Dixon told commissioners.

The two variance cases led commissioners to review their setback rules. Now they are looking at the variance process itself.

"I don't want people to get to that point in the process and be that surprised," Vice Mayor C.J. Hoyt said.

Dixon said he already tells applicants when staff cannot support a variance request. But commissioners said those warnings should be clearer, perhaps by putting it in writing.

That would let applicants know the risks before they spend more money on engineering plans and the town's $750 application fee.

Officials said many applicants misunderstand the “hardship” requirement, citing such things as a project’s cost or personal situations.

"A lot of money; it's hard for my family — those aren't legal hardships," Town Attorney Nancy Meyer said.

Commissioners also discussed changing how multiple variances are reviewed.

In Pownall’s case, staff told him he needed no less than four variances for his proposed exterior stairways because they would encroach into setback areas.

But the magistrate who heard Pownall’s case treated all four variances as one request, which he denied.

Meyer suggested that each variance receive its own staff analysis and separate ruling.

That would make the decisions easier for property owners to understand as well as appeal, she said.

That appeal process also was the subject of discussion.

The town code requires appeals to go before the commission rather than the circuit court, which is how appeals in most Florida cities are handled, Meyer said.

“I think we should definitely make that code change,” she said.

Officials also cleared up another point of confusion.

Some applicants have said they were told they would have to wait at least a year if their variance was denied before they could file for another.

But after reviewing the town code, officials said they found no such requirement.

The proposed changes are expected to come back to the commission for further discussion before any revisions are adopted.