The URL can be used to link to this page

12/14/1999 (2) ,~ J " ,~ ',\ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER December 14, 1 999 , Present: Gerald Figurski Edward Mazur, Jr. David Gildersleeve Shirley Moran Carlen A. Petersen Alex Pliska William Johnson Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Also Present: Pamela Akin Leslie Dougall-Sides Ralph Stone Cynthia Hardin Lisa Fierce Gary Jones , Mark Parry Etim Udoh Brenda Moses City Attorney - arrived 4:33 p.rn, Assistant City Attorney - departed 4:33 p.rn, Planning Director Assistant Planning Director Development Review Manager Senior Planner Planner , Senior Planner Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and a review of meeting procedures and the appeal process. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. ITEM 1 - REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCES/RECONSIDERA TION 1. American InfoAoe. LLC communication tower, 505 Virginia Lane (Requests for reconsideration have been submitted by Mr. Hitch and Mr. Baralt) Planning Director Ralph Stone said after the CDB (Community Development Board) approved the telecommunications tower application in November, AT&T representative Kevin Becker had forwarded the firm's position to the City and a newspaper article addressed the issue. Two neighbors of the proposed tower have requested the COB reconsider the action. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said approval of the application was subject to conditions. The Rules of Procedure provide that reconsideration or rehearing of a decision of the Board may be requested by the Planning staff, applicant, or interested party, and must be requested at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board. When contemplating a reconsideration, testimony should be treated as a quasi-judicial matter with cross-examination permitted. Concern was expressed someone can claim a mistake was made after any controversial decision. Ms. Dougall-Sides said a "mistake" of fact differs from a claim that a board had acted inappropriately. mcd1299 1 12/14/99 ') Three residents spoke in support of the request for reconsideration, AT&T Wireless Services Site Acquisition and Collocation Manager Kevin Becker said his firm has an agreement with the School Board regarding the Arcturas Avenue tower which has no additional capacity. He said American InfoAge had approached AT&T regarding collocation or building a new tower at that site. The School Board must approve any collocation. He said in September 1999, School Board representative Jim Miller contacted him regarding the American InfoAge application. On September 16, 1999, he wrote to Mr. Miller and faxed a copy to Mr. Stone indicating AT&T encourages collocation. He said AT&T leases space from the School Board. Offers to rebuild the tower should be submitted to the School Board. As a tenant, AT&T must be part of any related proceedings to protect the firm's system and interests. " '_J In response to a question regarding his July 12, 1999 e-mail to Nextel, Mr. Becker said the complete a-mail had not been presented as it also had addressed pending lease issues. It was stated Mr. Becker's e-mail, which was submitted at the November COB meeting, had indicated the tower would neither be rebuilt nor refurbished and that Mr. Becker had advised Nextel twice previously that the tower was not available for collocation. Mr. Becker said the e-mail had indicated the tower cannot handle additional collocators currently and issues between AT&T Wireless and the School Board' had not been resolved to allow collocation, rebuilding, or refurbishing the tower. He said negotiations have continued for approximately two years. In response to a question, Mr. Becker said AT&T wants to remain on the air and is willing to collocate on the tower with as many carriers as possible. He said if the Sch'ool Board is wHling to work with other carriers, he also will consider it, He understands other carriers need local coverage. Ed Armstrong, American InfoAge representative, opposed reconsideration. He said AT&T's promise is vague. He felt no misrepresentation, mistake, or fraud had been committed and no new information had been presented. He said evidence presented by AT&T indicates the School Board tower cannot accommodate collocators. He said the Board's process requires substantial competent evidence. He said AT&T had not appeared at the November meeting. He said the applicant has 3 vendors willing to share the proposed tower. He said the Board is not authorized to suggest a private sector remedy to replace a tower with a monopole without considering related expenses. Miller Cooper, applicant, said Joe Feraca of the School Board had told him the School Board is responsible for the tower and did not intend to rebuild it. It was remarked that Dr. Hinesley's November 10, 1999 letter to the City Manager, stated the School Board was agreeable to a meeting only if AT&T representatives particIpated in discussions. During a meeting with staff, the School Board had indicated a willingness to consider a tower on their property. ~ Frustration was expressed that AT&T had not been present at previous COB meetings. It was felt the Board's decision had been based on testimony that misrepresented AT&T's position. It was recommended the case be reconsidered. mcd 1 299 2 12/14/99 . . ~ ,F , ,") If the case is reconsidered, it was suggested a deadline be established for all concerned parties to participate in negotiations. Mr. Armstrong suggested that AT&T had changed its position. He said AT&T's stated willingness to discuss a new tower is beyond the scope of City Code. He felt the Board is penalizing his client with another delay because AT&T chose not to attend a hearing. AT&T Community Affairs Director Mary Helen Keen said AT&T had not been notified of or invited to any meetings. AT&T will work with the School Board to resolve the problem but AT&T cannot rebuild a tower it does not own. Mr. Stone said staff had recommended approval after evidence had indicated the School property was not an option. . Concern was expressed regarding establishing a precedent and that COB decisions can be challenged jf interested parties are not in attendance. Concern was expressed that submitted evidence may not accurately reflect another party's true position. '~) ',- " Mr. Cooper said postponements of this case allowed staff and the City Manager to contact AT&T and the School Board. He said he had acknowledged AT&T's position regarding their School Board contract and had submitted cost estimates to rebuild the tqwer and relocate School Board facilities to a new tower. Even if the School Board tower is rebuilt, a single tower is insufficient to accommodate all carriers. He said AT&T cannot be expected to rebuild a tower or construct a new one to accommodate competitors. Member Petersen moved to approve the request for reconsideration. The motion was duly seconded. It was felt no misrepresentation, fraud, or mistake had been made. Concern was expressed regarding the process and ability to reach a decision in a reasonable time.' It' was felt 2 towers are necessary to accommodate all carriers. The importance of adjacent property owners' concerns was stated. Upon the vote being taken, Members Petersen, Moran, Johnsol), and Pliska voted "Aye"; Members Gildersleeve and Mazur and Chair Figurski voted "Nay." Motion carried 4:3. The meeting recessed from 3: 15 to 3:22 p.m. ITEM 2 - CONTINUED ITEMS - None, ITEM 3 - LEVEL 2 APPLICATIONS' ,:) 1. eDSe FL99-01 0-18 and TOR 99-10-01 - 10 Papaya Street and 11 San Marco Street (receiver site) and 423 Mandalav Avenue (sender site) Owner/Applicant: Mandalay Beach Club, Ltd., c/o John Hobach, President.; mcd 1 299 3 1 2/14/99 , " ') Location: 1.63 acres located between Papaya Street and San Marca Avenue, an the east and west sides of North Gulfview Boulevard (receiver site); Zoning: T (Tourist District); Proposed Use: A condominium development with 157 dwelling units. The applicant requests flexible development approval to permit attached dwellings as a Comprehensive Redevelopment In-fill Project, with front setbacks on both street frontages reduced from 10-1 5 feet to zero feet, side setback (east property line) reduced from 10 feet to zero feet, and a height increase from 35-50 feet to 145 feet; TDR ITransfer of Development Rights) approval to permit transfer of nine development rights from 423 Mandalay Avenue to 10 Papaya Street and 11 San Marco Avenue; and vacation of the Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way, through the center of the site from Papaya Street to San Marco Avenue. Member Mazur reported a conflict of interest and did not participate in the discussion. :) The 1.63-acre site is between Papaya Street and San Marco Avenue, on both sides of North Gulfview Boulevard. The site is developed with commercial and residential single.story structures. The 45.year old buildings have declining rents and increasing vacancies. The site is a top candidate for beach redevelopment and revitalization. Adjacent uses include apartments, motels, a Hilton Hotel, and retail establishments. . The applicant proposes to raze the structures on site and construct 157 condominium units. Phase I will include the northern building, a swimming pool, amenities building, and village green; Phase II will add the southern tower. Underground parking will be provided under each tower. Staff feels the project offers high quality architecture and landscape design. The Comprehensive In-fill Request for a zero setback from streets and the east property line for the parking garage are consistent with community character. The Board of Adjustment and Appeal will consider the developer's request for a 3-foot setback from the seawall where an 18-foot setback is required. The towers will be 120 feet apart and provide a view corridor. The development will be 145 feet tall. The sender site for the TDR at 423 Mandalay Avenue is a City-owned parking lot. The applicant will transfer 9 , residential dwelling units to that site from the Meridian on Sand Key. The proposal also requests vacation of Gulfview Boulevard between San Marco and Papaya. The development will enhance the area and promote private sector investment. The proposal complies with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval for Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment project use, and with the Community Development Code. ,,J Staff recommends approval subject to conditions. Mr. Stone said Condition #2 considers the seawall, an issue associated with the Building Code. He suggested amending the language to read "this condition applies if it is determined it is a seawall." Assistant City Engineer Mike Quillen said Engineering staff supports vacation of North Gulfview Boulevard. City sewer, water, and gas lines will be relocated at developer expense. mcd 1 299 4 12/14/99 ") Michael Cheezem, applicant, said the proposal contemplates a high-quality development on Clearwater beach. He said the Mandalay Beach Club will evolve Into a mixed-use community after redevelopment of commercial parcels. The architecture is compatible with surrounding hotels and the buildings will be tiered. Robert PergoJizzi, project planner and engineer, said with the vacation of North,Gulfview Boulevard, the site will be 2.04 acres. Parking exceeds Code minimums, The development will attract permanent and seasonal residents. Streetscape improvements will be completed before the project. Phase I is expected to be completed in 2002. , Two residents spoke in opposition to the application, expressing concern regarding the Transfer of Density Rights and the proposed project's height. ,.. Mr. Armstrong said the proposal includes exchanging one-for-one units between the Meridian project on Sand Key and the City-owned lot. Mr. Stone said the one-mile limitation fer TDRs is too restrictive. During the review of the Community Development Code; staff will recommend an amendment. In response to a question, Mr. Stone said nothing can be built on the parking lot once the units , are transferred. TORs have monetary value and can be sold. Mr, Armstrong said a settlement agreement regarding property to the west of the subject site established density that runs with the land. i .I __...+Jo Ms. Fierce said staff had estimated the height of the Hilton Hotel generally based on 12-feet per story. Mr. Stone said without the TORs, the project's height would be limited to 100 feet. Some south Pinellas County buildings that extend from lot line to line lot do not feature view corridors. In response to a question, Mr. Stone said no TOR pool exists. Unused development potential can be sold and recorded in City and County records. Ms. Dougall-Sides said Cheezum Corporation and the City had entered into a settlement agreement in 1997. The land Assembly Assistance Agreement contemplates court approval of another amendment. It is anticipated the City Commission will consider that agreement soon. While the court has continuing jurisdiction, parties can come request amendment approval. Ms. Dougall-Sides said a height limitation will need to be addressed separately from the development agreement with the court, Mr. Armstrong said design requirements in the settlement agreement expire in 2002. The density computation is perpetual. The site plan addresses setbacks, FARs, etc. that are valid and binding. The City Commission conceptually approved the development agreement and approved the land Assembly petition in October 1999. The development agreement will be formally addressed in January 2000. One development agreement provision contemplates amending the final order by joint stipulation to indicate the transfer of density had accommodated the height increase. In response to a question, Mr. Armstrong said buildings will not be built in rights-of-way. ~ mcd 1299 5 1 2/14/99 ') Member Gildersleeve moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the Information submitted by the applicant and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Mandalay Beach Club limited is in compliance with the Community Development Plan. Therefore, he moved that the Community Development Board recommend the request for flexible development approval filed by Mandalay Beach Club Limited at 10 Papaya Street and 11 San Marco Avenue be granted subject to conditions: 1) The application be effective upon City Commission approval of development agreement: 2) the Board of Adjustment and Appeal approval of request to reduce seawall setback is required, or the site be redesigned to meet the 18-foot setback from seawall requirement, if it is determined that the structure is a seawall; and 3' that the Gulfview Boulevard r;ght~ of-way be vacated by the City Commission. The motion was duly seconded. Members Petersen, Johnson, and Plisko and Chair Figurski voted IIAye"; Member Moran voted "Nay." Motion carried 5:1. Member Mazur was not present for the' vote. 2. Case FL99-010-17 - 3063 Homestead Court Owner/Applicant/ Representative: Mr. Gary Young; Location: 0.3 acres located on the south side of Homestead Court, approximately 950 feet east of Abbey Lake Road: Zoning: LOR ILow Density Residential District); Proposed Use: A 490-square foot addition to an existing 2,661 square foot single-family dwelling. ,- -..... , '-J Planner Mark Parry said staff had received 3 letters in opposition to the application. The applicant requests flexible development approval at 3063 Homestead Court for an addition to a single-family dwelling, with a 5-foot side setback reduction to 10 feet as part of a Residential In-fill Redevelopment project. Surrounding uses include single family residences. The applicant proposes to construct an addition on the north side of the house. While related deed restrictions require a 30-foot front setback, the addition will be set back 33 feet from the front property line. The height is consistent with the neighborhood and the zoning district's maximum height of 30 feet. The proposal meets the standards and criteria for flexible development approval with the maximum development potential, the criteria for residential In-fill projects, and the Community Development Code. Staff recommends approval of the residential in-fill project for a 490 square foot addition tc: a single-family dwelling and a reduction in the side setback to 10 feet. Gary Young, applicant, said he had built the home 8 years ago when neighborhood covenants allowed 1 O-foot side yard setbacks. He requests the same use of his property as neighbors have done. The front is the only potential site for an addition. Two residents opposed the request stating deed restrictions require changes be'submitted to the architectural review committee of the Homeowner's Association. 'J In response to questions, Mr. Young said the project has been redesigned to include an enlarged the entry/foyer and interior connection from the addition to the house. He said he plans to submit the redesign to the Homeowner's Association following COB approval. He said the addition will be used as a guest suite, study, mcd 1299 6 12114/99 _"_ L. c4' ...~. ") children's playroom, etc. He does not intend to rent the room or use it as an office, He said this request represents a third plan. The Association had approved th9 first plan but rejected the second plan because of a two-story addition. Member Johnson moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted by the appHcant, and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Gary Young for property at 3063 Homestead Court be granted. The motion was duly seconded. Members Petersen, Johnson, Mazur, and Pliska and Chair Figurski voted "Aye"; Member Moran voted "Nay." Motion carried 6:1. 3. Case FL99-1 0-19 - 402 and 420 Jeffords Street Owner/applicant: Orthopedic Surgery Center of Clearwater, L.L.C.; Location: .048 acres located on the northeast corner of Jeffords Street and Bay Avenue (402 Jeffords Street), and on the north side of Jeffords Street, approximately 300 feet west of Ft. Harrison Avenue (420 Jeffords Street). Zoning: 0 (Office District); Proposed Use: Medical clinic. "-, , ....... I" This request is for flexible development approval of a change of use from a blood bank to medical clinic as a Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project at 402 Jeffords Street. Property at 420 Jeffords Street will be used for parking and support offices. The area is dominated by medical and residential uses. The applicant proposes a medical clinic for the site occupied by Hunter Btood Center. The current use is defined in the Community Development Code as "Problematic" and is not permitted in the Office District. The applicant proposes a use that meets all Flexible Standard criteria except it is not located on a major arterial road. Plans include enlarged landscaping buffers and removal of 4 parking spaces within front setbacks. The site is on the edge of the Morton Plant Mease medical complex. Staff feels the applicant needs to meet the Code's maximum impervious surface ratio of 75 %. Staff feels the proposal complies with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval, with the maximum development potential and Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project criteria, and with all applicable standards of the Community Development Code. Staff recommends approval of the application for Flexible Development for a change of use from blood bank to medical clinic, as a Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project at 402 and 420 Jeffords Street, with the condition that the impervious surface ratio not exceed the Code maximum of 75%. In response to a question, Ms. Fierce said the building at 420 Jeffords Street will be used for ancillary administrative uses. No patients will be seen there. Charles Jacobson, representative, agreed to staff's' recommendations. J Member Johnson moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted by the applicant, and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Orthopedic Surgery Center for 402 and 420 Jeffords Street be granted as recommended by staff. The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. mcd1299 7 12/14/99 , , . "..... I. -'.' . '. .) 4. Case FL99~09-1 5 - 510 South Hiahland Avenue Owner/applicant: Henry and Mary Ann Boerner; Location: 0.17 acres located on the northwest corner of Rogers Street and South Highland Avenue. Zoning: 0 (Office District); Proposed Use: A 1,700 square foot veterinarian office. This request is for Flexible Development approval of a Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project with a reduction in required parking from nine to four spaces, a reduction in front setback from 25 feet to zero feet, and a reduction of side setbacks from ten feet to three feet (north) and five feet (west). Surrounding uses include a motel, and residential structures. Commercial and residential uses dominate the area. The applicant proposes to renovate the building as a veterinary office, a use permitted within the Office District. However, the site is within 100 feet of residentially zoned property. The applicant has submitted signed statements from the two abutting property owners stating no objection to the proposal. The site is noncompliant with most zoning standards including minimum lot area, impervious surface ratio, front and side setbacks, parking, and landscape buffers. Highland Avenue functions as a north/south collector road. The recent widening of Highland Avenue has resulted in insufficient parking and difficult ingress/egress. The applicant plans to develop the site to its fullest potential. "-J '...... The proposed business will operate by "appointment-only" and provide outpatient treatment only. Site improvements include removing two parking spaces from the right-~f-way, removing 1,100 square feet of pavement, repaving/restriping the parking area, installing landscape buffers on street frontages, removing ingress/egress point on South Highland Avenue, improving other access points, installing a new roof, and painting. The proposal complies with standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval, with the maximum development potential, with the Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project criteria, and with all applicable standards of the Community Development Code. Staff recommends approval of the Flexible Development application for a veterinary clinic, with a reduction of 5 parking spaces to four, a 25-foot reduction in the front setback to zero, and reduction of 10-foot side setbacks to 3 feet (north) and 5 feet (west), A recommendation was made for a condition requiring the business to operate on an appointment-only basis. John Brunson, representative, agreed with the staff report. He said the facility veterinarian has operated on an appointment-only basis for 1 5 years. He said the proposal will encourage neighborhood improvements. He said the site currently has no viable use and has deteriorated, He agreed to the suggested ,condition requiring an appointment-only business. . .... .J Member Petersen moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted by the applicant, and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Henry and Mary Anne Boerner for 510 South Highland Avenue be granted, with the condition that the business operate on an appointment-only and outpatient basis. The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0'. mcd 1299 B 12/14/99 . " . .'.'". 4 -~ ' .. 1r '. ~ 5. Case TDR 99-10-02 - 325 South Gulfview Boulevard (sender site) and 349 South Gulfview Boulevard (receiver site). Owner/applicant: Clara and Dorothy Buldog; Location: 1.72 acres located on the east side of South Gulfview Boulevard approximately 150 feet north of Fifth Street. Zoning: T (Tourist District), Proposed Use: An existing motel (receiver site). '~ J This request is to transfer 13 dwelling units from 349 South Gulfview Boulevard {sender site/McDonald's under construction} to 325 South Gulfview Boulevard (receiver site/existing Americana Motel). Both sites are zoned Tourist and have the same plan category. The vicinity is dominated by commercial, restaurant, and overnight accommodation uses. Prior to construction of the McDonald's, the properties had common ownership and parcel identification. The transfer of development rights will allow the applicant to retain units owned prior to division of the property. The applicant intends to use 4 dwelling units to conform to motel density requirements for a reduced lot size. The 9-unit balance will remain available 'to Americana for future development. Staff feels the proposal complies with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval, with the maximum development potential, with all applicable standards of the Community Development Code, and with standards for a TDR. Planning staff recommends approval of the Flexible development and Transfer of Development Rights application, to transfer 13 dwelling units from 347 South Gulfview Boulevard to 325 South Gulfview Boulevard. At the time of redevelopment of the Americana Hotel, a site plan will be required to ensure compliance with all requirements of the Community Development Code. It was remarked the former Development Code Adjustment Board had denied this application previously. Mr. Stone said following denial of a site plan'that had included a drive-through, the applicant made changes to comply with all provisions of the former Code. Tim Johnson, representative, reviewed the lots involved in the transfer and indicated agreement with staff's report, He requested the transfer of density requirement have no expiration date. One person spoke in opposition of the application. Member Johnson moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted' by the applicant, and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Clara and Dorothy Buldog for transfer of 13 dwellings units from 349 South Gulfview, Boulevard to 325 South Gulfview Boulevard be granted, including Lots 63 -66, 113 - 117, and part of Lot 11 2 that by amendment was added as part of the receiver site, the balance of Lot 11 2 with Lot 111, and with no time requirement. The motion was duly seconded. In response to a question, City Attorney Pam Akin said TDRs are permanent and require a formal deed. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried 7:0. mcd 1 299 9 12/14/99 ~ 6. Case FL99~10-20 - 980 Bav Esolanade Owner/applicant: Donald P. Kleinhans. Location 0.23 acres located on the west side of Bay Esplanade, approximately 110 feet north of Carlouel Drive. Zoning: LMDR (Low Medium Density Residential District). Proposed Use: A 504 square foot 2-car attached garage, 405 square foot 1 ~car attached garage, 100 square foot entrance, and 1,307 square foot third story addition to an existing single-fa'mily house. This request is for Flexible Development approval, as part of a Residential In- fill Project, for a 22.9-foot reduced front setback to 2.1 feet, and a 7.5 foot increase in height to 37.5 feet. The applicant proposes to construct an addition to his single-family residence including an attached 2-car garage on the southeast side of the house, an attached 1-car garage on the northeast side of the house, a new entrance, and a new third story. The existing garages are too small and, along with the driveway, are submerged during storms. , --) '"J At 3 7.5 feet, the 3td story addition will maximize the site's development potential. The surrounding area is undergoing redevelopment. The request to reduce the front setback and increase the height is in keeping with the nature of the area. Adjacent land uses are single-family residences. Staff believes the proposal complies with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval, with the maximum development potential and Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project criteria, and with all applicable standards of the Community Development Code. Staff recommends approval of the application to ,expand a single-family house, reduce the front setback from 25 feet to 2.1 feet, and increase the building height from 30 feet to 37.5 feet. Harry Cline, representative, said the new garages will address storm related flooding. The house was built in 1941. He said the applicant wishes to maintain the character of the neighborhood. The road is narrow and winding. Redevelopment is economically impractical without Flexible Development approval. Mr. Stone said a number of structures in the neighborhood are similar to this one. Sufficient area outside the garage will allow cars to park without encroaching on the right-of-way. Member Gildersleeve moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted by the applicant, and the testimony heard today, the application submitted by Donald P. Kleinhans for an expansion of a single-family house with a reduced front setback from 25 feet to 2.1 feet. and an in'crease in building height from 30 feet to 37.5 feet, for 980 Bay Esplanade. The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. .J 7. Case FL99-09-16 - 1108 North Greenwood Avenue Owner: City of Clearwater; Applicant: Greenwood Community Health Resource Center, Inc. Location: 0.25 acres located on the southwest corner of LaSalle Street and North Greenwood Avenue. Zoning: C (Commercial District). Proposed Use: A 3,290 square foot medical center. mcd1299 10 12/14/99 ~ This request is for a Flexible Development approval, as part of a Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project, for a reduction of 13 parking spaces to 5 spaces, a front setback reduction to 3 feet, and a reduction in minimum lot area from 20,000 square feet to 10,778 square feet for property at 1108 North Greenwood Avenue. The applicant proposes to construct a free medical clinic and community/education center on a vacant lot. The clinic will provide needed medical and community services to the neighborhood. The lot, owned by the City, is part at the Brownfields Redevelopment Program and will be leased to the Greenwood Community Health Resource Center. The lot is relatively small. Setback reductions are necessary to construct a building large enough to serve the community. The proposed 3,290 square foot structure will cover 30% of the property. Upgraded landscaping will exceed requirements of the Code. Adjacent land uses include a vacant lot, a cinema/cate, a commercial establishment, and residential units. The area features a mix of commercial and residential uses. The site was designed to protect 2 oak trees and maximize parking and landscaping. As this will be a neighborhood center, many clients ,-:,i11 walk, reducing parking needs. The City will benefit from a health care clinic within walking distance to most North Greenwood residents. A City parking facility is within 600 feet of the site. The proposal complies with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval, with the maximum development potential, criteria for Comprehensive Redevelopment In-fill Project approval.. and with all applicable standards of the Community Development Code. Planning staff recommends approval. ) ~~/ In response to a question, Steve Fowler, Fowler Associates Architects, Inc., said the site is clean. He said underground tanks had been removed and minimal contamination in the western portion of the site was deemed insignificant under Brownfields guidelines. Member Johnson moved that based on the findings and conclusions stated in the staff report, the information submitted by the applicant, and the testimony heard today, the application for a Comprehensive In-fill Redevelopment Project, with a reduction in parking spaces from 13 to 5 spaces, reduction in front setback -from 25 to 3 feet, and a reduction in minimum lot area from 20,000 square feet to 10,778 square feet, for the site at 1108 North Greenwood Avenue as submitted by the City of Clearwater be granted. The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. ITEM 4 - LEVEL 3 APPLICATIONS 1. Case 299-1 0~01 - 60B Oranae Avenue Owner/applicant: Jerry and Lynda Gilliam; Location: 0.21 acres located on the west side of Orange Avenue, east of Lima Avenue, approximately 200 feet south of Turner Street. J The applicant requests rezoning to allow construction of a single-family residence on the rear lot at 608 Orange Avenue. The site is platted with two lots and has sufficient density through the Future Land Use Plan, but requires rezoning to a corresponding district to use the density. Surrounding uses are single and multi-family residential and vacant property. Comprehensive Plan objective 2.5 mcd 1299 , 1 1 2/14/99 ,~ supports the proposed amendment by encouraging urban fill on parcels smaller than one acre. The proposed single-family residence and lot size will be in character with surrounding uses and will not adversely affect the use of other area properties. The 0.21 acre site would allow two single.family residences or three multifamily units based on 15 units per acre in the Residential Medium land use category. Staff recommends amending the site's zoning district designation from Low Density Residential (LOR) to Medium Density ResidentiaIIMOR). Mr. Jones reported the City had received two letters of opposition. It was remarked that the smallest MDR lot, excluding hi-rises, is 6,000 square feet. Concern was expressed that lot siz'ils are important and changing zoning to allow two houses on 4,620 square feet is substandard for the neighborhood. Senior Planner Gary Jones said nearby homes are on smaller lots. Concern was expressed those houses had been built in the 1 940s and this old established neighborhood is being "squeezed out." Staff stated all issues were considered and felt this request is consistent with the neighborhood, which has multi-family uses and a mix of lot sizes. The rear lot is separately platted and similar to a residentialln~fill situation. ........... ,) Guy Rosati, applicant representative, said a house is preferred to apartments or condominiums. The house on the front of the property will be renovated and sold. This site is in a transitional area between homes and rental properties. He said the project will benefit the neighborhood. Jerry Gilliam, owner, said nearby multi-family units are located on similarly sized lots. Member Gildersleeve moved to approve the request to amend the zoning district designation of the subject site at 608 Orange Avenue as requested by Jerry and Lynda Gilliam from Low Density Residential (LOR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). The motion was duly seconded. Members Mazur, Gildersleeve, Peterson and Johnson and Chair Figurski voted "Aye"; Members Moran and Pliska voted "Nay." Motion carried 5:2. 2. Case LUZ99-20~04 - 2463 Gulf-to~Bav Boulevarg Owner/applicant: Sunny Grove Mobile Home Park, Inc. Location: 1.6 acres located on the south side of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, approximately 100 feet east of Edenvil1e Avenue. The applicant requests to amend tho Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map from Residential Low Medium (RLM) to Commarcial General (CG), and to rezone from Mobile Home Park District to Commercial (C) district for 2463 Gulf-to- Bay Boulevard. The property has 250 feet of frontage. Surrounding uses include retail, office, and a mobile home park. The property owner requests the plan amendment and rezoning application to convert vacant mobile home lots to recreational vehicle spaces. Current zoning does not allow the proposed use. --.J The Sunny Grove Mobile Home Park was daveloped in 1948. The park's north section has obsolete mobile homes on lots too small to accommodate standard mobile homes. Limited site improvements are planned and no mobile home residents will be relocated. The proposed plan amendment is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with the surrounding area and natural mcd 1299 12 12/14/99 1) environment, is consistent with City and State development regulation, and does not require or affect the provision of public services. Prior to development, site plan approval is required and must meet City and SWFWMD ISouthwest Florida Water Management District) stormwater management criteria. The site is not within an "environmentally sensitive area. This portion of Gulf.to-Bay Boulevard has a LOS (Level of Service) F. Any redevelopment of this site will add to area congestion. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Jones said the applicant wishes to attract seasonal recreational vehicle owners., In response to a concern regarding the internal roadway system, owner Frank Struchen said Druid Road runs through the lower third of the park. A horseshoe turnaround to McMullen Booth Road is south of Druid Road and a horseshoe turnaround is within the park. Older mobile homes will be removed. Mr. Struchen said he plans to add residents and enhance park aesthetics. He said approximately 110 residents live in the park during peak season. Ten of 25 homes in the front section are resident.owned. He said the park has adequate space for anyone who ,wishes to stay in the park. He said he is willing to work with residents to trade other homes. ') Member Johnson moved approval of amending the Future land Use Plan designation of the subject site at 2463 Gulf-to.Bay Boulevard from Residential low Medium (RlM) to Commercial General (CG), and amending the zoning district designation of the site from Mobile Home Park IMHP) zoning to Commercial (C). The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. 3. Case ANX99-1 0-20 - 3150 McMullen Booth Road Owner/applicant: Robert and Nancy Hurst. Location: 0.46 acres located on the west side of McMullen. Booth Road, approximately 4,600 feet north of SR 580, The applicant requests annexation of the property at 3150 McMullen Booth Road and approval of the appropriate City Future land Use Plan category and zoning district pending the outcome ,of Item 4-4, The annexation will not adversely impact public facilities and levels of service, The current use is single-family residential. Surrounding uses include a church; a preschool; and an office. The applicant will pay applicable sewer impact fees, tape fee, utility deposit, and costs to extend utility lines to the property if necessary. The application is consistent with the Community Development Code and City regulations, the Countywide plan, Florida law, and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval. Nancy Hurst, owner, concurred with staff's recommendation. One person spoke in favor of the application. ....) Member Johnson moved approval of the annexation of 31 50 McMullen Booth Road, approval of the Residential Suburban (RS) Future land Use category (pending case LUZ 99-' 0-05), and approval of the low Density Residential (lOR) zoning district at 31 50 McMullen Booth Road. The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. mcd 1 299 13 12/14/99 'j 4. Case LUZ99-10-05 - 3150 McMullen Booth Road Owner/applicant: Robert and Nancy Hurst Location: 0.46 acres located on the west side of McMullen-Booth Road approximately 4,600 feet north of SR 580. The applicant requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential/Office Limited (R/OL), and to rezone from County Agriculture/Estate zoning to Office (0) district. The property owner requests this plan amendment and rezoning application to convert a single- family residence into an office. Limited site improvements are planned for the site with the exception of handicapped access, parking, and landscaping. These issues will be addressed in more detail during the development review process. This site is along the McMullen Booth scenic corridor of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan and is designated residential. The site is smaller than one half acre. The character is not residential and will minimally impact the scenic corridor. The application is consistent with the Community Development Code and City regulations, the Countywide plan, Florida Law, and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval. Member Johnson moved approval of the application to amend the Future land Use Plan designation of the subject site from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential/Office Limited (R/Ol), and amend the zoning district designation of the subject site at 3150 McMullen Booth Road from County zoning to Office (0). The motion was duly seconded and carried 7:0. c........... ,~ 5. Case ANX99-10-21 - 1735 West Manor Avenue Owner: Nabil and Nadia Yousef; Location: 0.1567 acres located on the east side of West manor Avenue, approximately 550 feet south of Manor Boulevard North; Zoning: R-3 (Residential Low Density District) (Pinellas County) The applicant requests annexation of property at 1735 West Manor Avenue and approval of the appropriate City land use plan category and zoning district to receive City water and sewer service. The property will have a land use plan designation of Residential Low and it is proposed to be zoned Low Medium Density Residential District (LMDR). Construction is in progress based on a building plan approved by the County prior to this request. The annexation will eliminate an enclave. The annexation is consistent with the Community Development Code and City regulations, with the Countywide plan, with Florida Law, and with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval. Arthur Timothy Doyle, representative and contractor, said he is building a house that conforms to the neighborhood. Member Johnson moved to recommend to the City Commission approval of annexation of property at 1735 West Manor Avenue, approval of the Residential Low plan category pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, and approval of the Low Medium Residential (LMDR) zoning district pursuant to the City's Community Development Code. The motion was dUly seconded and carried 7:0. " --J ITEM 5 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - November 16. 1999 mcd 1299 14 12/14/99 ''Ii,', "', :...., r:..... . ':~ . , . ~ c " . t'. Member Gildersleeve moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 16, 1999; as submitted in written in summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM 6 - DIRECTOR'S ITEMS - Rev~ew Code UDdate Schedule Member Moran was thanked for her efforts in organizing the Christmas luncheon. It was suggested annexations, etc., be considered as part of a consent agenda. It was ncited Code requires the applicant's presence at the hearing and allows the Board to continue or deny a case until the applicant appears. A Chair and Vice-chair will be elected in January. Due to a City ,Commission meeting schedule change, consensus was to reschedule the January CDS meeting to January 25, 2000, at 1 :00 p.m. Consensus was for staff to present Code revisions then. Concern was expressed time is insufficient for the parties to resolve the telecommunication tower issue before January 25, 2000. Concern was expressed with references to the Hunter Blood Bank as a problematic use because it falls into a general category. It was suggested staff ) distinguish such uses in the Code. '~-r'.t :J Concern was expressed that a recent newspaper article unfairly expressed a reporter's negative opinion of the COB. It was fel~ CDS members are dedicated, knowledgeable and perform an outstanding job. ITEM 7 - ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. ard J, mcd1299 15 12/14/99 , , . .....". . ..... , j ~. . . FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS NAME OF bOARD, COUNCIL. COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMl EE :r r G Bp_v1- THORITY OR COMMITTEE OS COUNTY PI nl!!.. fd..s )-(CITY 0 COUNn 0 OTHER LOC"I. AGENCY NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION; C-) WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, chy, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or commillec. II applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who arc presented .....ith a voting connicl of interest under Section 112,3143, Florida Slatutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conniel of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close allcntion to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form, INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES "\A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal. or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting On II measure " ---'which inures to his special private gain. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting On a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is ret3ined (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he is retained); to the special private gain of a relative; or to the special private gain of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-Vole basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in- law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowncr of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situatior15 described above, you must disclose the connict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes, APPOJNTED OFFICERS: Allhough you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the connict before making any attempt to innuence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction, IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY A TIEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WLL BE TAKEN: · You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to innuence the decision) with the person respr.nsible for ~ recording the minures of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes, · A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form must be read publicly at the next meeting arrer the form is filed, CE FORM 8D - 10.91 "AGE I IF YOU MA.KE NO AITEMPTTO INFLUENCE THE DEdSJON EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION ATTBE MEETING: · You must disclose, omUy the nature of your connict In the measure before participating. · You must complete the form and file It within 15 days after the Yale occurs with I~e person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the (orm in lhe minutes. A copy of the form musl be provided immedialely 10 the o*, members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting liner the form is filed. ""'" DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFJCER'S INTEREST I, Ue....J M4)'''''''' ..:r. . . hercby dhclos< that on I z./J,/ ) '1 '5 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) _ inured to my special private gain; _ inured to the special gain of my business associate, ~ inured to the special gain of my relative, ~ in ured to the speciaJ gain of -:r- M c... Lk-I ...... n-\ l.l..., ; ..} \' eo whom I am retained; or _ inured to the special gain of , , is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me, (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my connicting interest in the measure is 35 follows: .19_: _.by , which {"r......." '.. It-Ill I?'? Date Filed NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~1I2.317 (1991), A FAJLURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOW',-, '11 IMPEACHMENT. REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT. DEMOTiON. REDUCTJ01\.f SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOTTO EXCEED S5,OOO, CE FORM 8B.IO~1 PAGE 2