adjustment and appeals hearing we've received this case in advance we've studied it and in some cases visited the site members if you did visit the site please disclose that during the discussion please understand we do not bring these cases we are citizens tasked with weighing the evidence submitted in order to make the most informed decision possible we've no personal interest or stake in these cases except for the overall good of the community staff has made a recommendation and that recommendation is input only and may not necessarily be the opinion of this board if you're planning to speak for against any application must be sworn in prior to testifying conduct and sworn in please do so now with the clerk at the front of the table this is how we'll proceed when the case is called the applicant should come to this podium give us your name and address the applicant will then present their case including comments from any supporters I don't think we have people in the audience I can't see them comments by supporters should be new information not just an expression of support opponents may then given the opportunity to state their opposition if there's numerous opponents it's preferable for them to select one or two spokespersons any subsequent objectors should add new information not just rehash prior stated objections opponents may also display the volume of objection by a show of hands the applicant made them return to the podium solely to rebut the comments of the opponents and may not bring any new information at that time we will then close the public hearing the board will discuss the case make a motion and vote now I ask mr. McAteer to further enhance our proceedings thank you mr. chair the matters heard by the board of adjustment and appeals are quasi-judicial in nature please note that only competent substantial fact-based testimony or evidence may be considered by the board in deciding the matters before it pure speculation or opinion based on competent facts cannot be legally considered by the board lay testimony with fact-based support including but not limited to meeting minutes surveys engineering reports etc may be considered competent and substantial evidence thank you michael you want to call the first case yes our first case var-25-17 this is a variance request to allow for the replacement of an existing legally non-conforming freestanding side which is 81 square feet with a new 128 square foot freestanding sign where the maximum allowable sign area in the general office zone is 50 square feet for the property located at 5800 49th Street North in Lealman staff recommends conditional approval so the subject property contains a medical office campus constructed in 1977 also the the signage for that site was from the 70s as well it's located at the intersection of 49th Street North and 58th Avenue North in Lealman the adjacent HCA Florida Northside Hospital which is directly to the west and the north of the subject property the sign is for the hospital so due to the large campus and expansive layout with multiple medical buildings that they want to have continue to use this sign that's located on the corner which is more visible intersection there to the for the hospital so it's it's important to note that the this property is not part of the hospital it's it's a separate property we do have they have easements allowable and the the owner of that property has given their okay to allow this sign to remain there so the HCA Florida hospital intends to replace the current sign with a larger one to improve wayfinding for patients and the community the existing freestanding sign is is illegal non-conforming as it exceeds the sign area limits established by the current code however the sign was lawfully permitted and installed in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time the proposed sign new sign will be illuminated double-sided 16 feet tall and have an area approximately 128 square feet there is no electronic messaging proposed with this sign all other code requirements such as height and setbacks are satisfied in this proposal the increase in the increase in sign area does require that's why they're here for variants we're requesting that applicant must obtain all required permits and applicable fees again staff recommends conditional approval of the sign thank you um in the spirit of disclosure um i um i would disclose that i am currently a board member of another hospital system uh and uh i am not recusing myself from this case because i do not have a conflict under florida law but i thought it would be appropriate to at least disclose that fact and mr bomstein just to clarify there's no relationship between the board that you serve on or the entity that you serve and the entity that has is the applicant today that's correct okay just want to clarify that for the record yeah and and my the entity i'm involved in is a not-for-profit i don't have any interest in it financially or otherwise so yeah as long as it's just even if it's enough as long as the two entities are unrelated that's the most important thing thank you uh with the applicant please come forward good morning your name and address please sure my name is jennifer ronberger my company is go permit my address is 9061 woodlark terrace boyton beach florida 33472 sorry about the lighting that's okay go ahead and uh give us uh give us your arguments sure exactly what was just stated really we're here looking for just to increase the size of our signs to replace the one that is currently there with something that's new we're looking for wayfinding in a time of need honestly like that is the most important thing for somebody to be able to see whether it is that they're going there is also another sign that is just i believe it's to the west of it if i'm not mistaken um i'm sorry the the north of it excuse me that was replaced that is on hospital property that is going to be the same size so we're looking for consistency so again just it's really wayfinding just to replace what's there and again as you had stated we do have approval from duke energy we have approval from everybody that's required in order to have our sign remain where it's at is um this sign is secondary the other sign is the primary they're going they're going to be the same size is that what you're asking no but the the other sign is at the main hospital entrance this one is by the medical office building so it's if one were primary and one were secondary this would be the secondary sign i guess that's where i'm i don't know if i don't know if i would say that because right where that sign is if you go down that street that is the hospital i would almost consider this one the primary okay so um for the direction of traffic yeah on this side of the road as you're traveling southbound this would be the first sign you would see correct okay um so michael help me out here and board bear with me because i survived the sign wars of the early part of this century when uh panellas county panellas county had a sweeping and vast sign code we do sometime in the 90s and everybody had 15 years we did a 15 year amortization to get rid of your non-conforming signs to meet the new sign code and sometime around 2005 6 7 and somewhere there the 15 year thing ran out and everybody and their brother was here asking for variances because they wanted to keep the sign they didn't you know that they had for the last 15 years and uh we just we heard sign cases you know endlessly um but the end result was that panellas county really cleaned up this huge sign almost unlimited sign uh regulations that they had and and signage in the county is smaller today so this sign under that sweeping redo should have been 50 square feet but it never got picked up and it was at 81 square feet and it's been living there at 81 square feet ever since that's correct okay so the existing sign is in violation because it's 60 60 or so percent bigger than yeah of today's code so today's code being non-conforming uh their option if uh they're just replacing the sign face and all that they can do like for like we we have that ability with it with a non-conforming uh sign um but they're looking for that increase which then does trigger the reason why we're here yeah may i say something also to this zoning district that it's in limits it to 50 square feet the hospital district that the other sign is on it is conforming so it's just this small piece of property that has that requirement yeah yeah the other sign uh that's located on the hospital property was able to go straight to permitting because it has a larger the institutional zoning that the hospital's on has a larger sign allowance than the general office okay so the two signs sit in two different zoning districts one being the hospital zoning institutional zoning and the other being medical office or office building zone office zoning and the office zoning sign which is the one that they want to replace has the more restrictive size requirements i guess my my so so let me ask you this you're there you need to go you're currently at 81 you want to go to 128 that's you know it's a lot more footage that's 58 percent more size wise what what are you gaining because it looks to me from the sketch from uh atlas sign that the information on the signs pretty much the same and you know i just looking at this i don't i don't see a crying need to have the larger sign you're getting the same information across well that's exactly what the issue here is so if you look at the sign code the way that it's written it really states that the sign itself if you were to maximize maximize the height which is 20 feet allowable and if you would calculate the square footage that way the sign would only be able to be two and a half feet wide which makes it not really unlegible honestly so and also the code also states that you have to calculate the entire sign face not just the copy area so we're really just asking for our larger size sign to meet within the sign height requirement and the you know we can't max out the height that we're allowed at 20 square feet because then the sign would only be two and a half feet wide okay let me try this again so the new sign is designed is 16 feet tall yes the existing sign i think i learned was 12 and a half feet tall correct so you're looking at three and a half more feet in height and that three and a half feet presents itself at the bottom of the sign with blank space basically so while all the information on the sign is the same what you've got you you you haven't added any more information you haven't really enhanced in my opinion the wayfinding abilities it's really not a wayfinding sign because everything's the same arrow there's one arrow there's two arrows but there everything's pointing either left or either right so it's not really so to speak wayfinding which would happen internal to the campus um i'm just i'm having trouble justifying a crying need for a sign that is egregiously larger than the code when the sign itself is not performing any better function than the existing sign you could put that new design face on the existing sign you just wouldn't have all the blank space at the bottom of the copy but code allows us to go up to 20 feet tall and we're not looking to even go that high so and the reason why we're asking for it is really strictly for visibility and consistency and again if we were in the zoning district that the hospital is on this is a hospital sign if we were in the zoning district the hospital would be on we wouldn't even be here we would have went straight through the permitting like we did with the other sign so we're that's what we're looking for we're just asking for consistency and we're looking for the increase in height but you're not in the zoning district i mean you're on property that you don't you don't own that property i i know but this is a uh secondary sign on property that is not owned by the hospital it's owned by the medical office building right with the with the ability for the hospital because the hospital property is behind it yeah i'll also make a point of my own experience um going to this hospital before in the past uh i was going down the area i did notice that like it wasn't it wasn't immediately clear where the hospital was because it's the first time i'd ever gone there um and then so i actually had to make a u-turn and because i passed it um but the my my only my other thought about this is that the signage is because hca is becoming very popular in the area the signage becoming consistency um it does help you know like your brain kind of goes to like oh i've seen this before i know where i you know i know what i'm looking for i've seen you know maybe it's not here maybe it might be somewhere else but it's very you know it's more of a consistency in the you know you know for for finding it um that's just my own my own personal experience on that and then you know with that i guess it would put the emergency much higher um you know did you know that that blank space at the top and the bottom pushes the emergency up higher which is you know i think for for all intents and purposes like that's the the most important part about this is identifying this is a hospital and this is an emergency it makes it more it's more of a um a current sign or a modern sign or is it lighted or is it it will be and this the one now is not i don't believe right yes also one thing we're not a restaurant or a shopping center we're a medical facility we are a hospital and people aren't out there really looking for the sign like they are in an absolute panic trying to get to where they have to get to so that's even why it's more important than just your regular standard signage that you would see out there if it was a restaurant or something or shopping center that's different that's not who we are the comments from the group is there anybody else i can't see there anybody else here that needs to speak to this case i don't see any other speakers for or opposed to this case um is there pleasure of the board and anybody want to make a motion i'd like to make a motion to approve based on the fact and findings of the um of the staff response and uh in granting the conditional approval of the signage second we have a motion and a second for conditional approval in accordance with the findings of fact as outlined in the staff report are there any other comments all in favor signify aye aye aye opposed okay so it passes five to one thank you you have your variance i'm sorry have a wonderful day thank you thank you very much everyone thank you uh we have minutes from the something meeting december meeting anybody care to approve seconds what's that i second so we have a motion made the motion either one we have a motion we have a second to approve the minutes of the december 3rd meeting all in favor signify aye aye opposed the motion passes the minutes are approved any other business before this meeting see you in february guys