02/20/2001 (2)
'"
Ii.
'"
" ,
. :.
4 ~'
"
". .'
~ ~
"
; q.
.',
"
, ~ '.
: ~
: j.~
'"
r
" ,
"
, f
"
.; i '.
,'i
"
"
, .
. ',' ~ ~
"
_~~,; .;,."",",~I,',;i\'~';!~L " t .
- ~ . t :' F' I. '. '"...... ",'
"
1,,-
" .
"
" ,. ,( :
"
,
ie"
-: ,)
r;~:;
.< 1~:.t:~r1~"
"
"
"
, "
~;.1
, :.
$~,..\ .
{~~', r.OC'
CDB
:.~~~; ; .:~ ~;... .
r"'"
::: J ~;. '.
',..:0;",... .
.h >:>
.~~ i... .;
it'(.:,,/ '
'!.~\I,T.. "
Community Develo'pme~t Board' Mee~i~g
,MINUTES,
<,
, J'
l:' {
i
1
:\
,I
I
,
'.
;
1
!
i
I
,
'\
ti,'. .....
{ . ~ . .
.rr~.I.:: "; ..'
. ~ \"
~~:;i~'::'.
"',
"
....,.
"
':!:
'1.,..
, '
"~: . ,",1>~' '. '~I
./' h'
, ,
o~/~oIOI
..
i;!';~(. .
::;;:'~;,9,:,',
" .
, ,
-
,\
,
I
I
Date<
" \
F' ..,
" .
"
,,'
, '
L '
, i
l:.
"
.: .
. ,E'
',~ .
.'
, '
.,
" ,
~ . ~
"
.,
','
:",,' "
't,'
, ;
",
"
:'1,
..
, "
!'
.+.' r'>
'1.\,.1:.
,:
t ~
'.',
.,'
"
,.', '.
'"
! '
l' .
,<0,
I;' ,
t ~ ~ T
.';'.,'
'.'{'..,:"
,,":' ".1 :;' ".
'.
" ,
0,
"
d-9r
J'
I',.
F ~ " .. >
.::>.
"
I'
. ,.\ ,!}
1~.".1' :: " J I"'
-.,,_~.~-.u;_,",,<J'-!.~ ''''''~<:l..........,';~'''~~,.''sl!';'t J"';JI.:~'i":...I'"''''''{\'~~~hWlllQrJt,.J;...~.............--=--''' ....... ..
.' ~.. -. ....-.... _..~... M"'~""'-'H"'~~.....,.,~'i.~.A~,J,~;". ~1~~.~~u...t:-$"".
--
ACTION AGENDA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
February 20, 2001
,
,
I
J
r
I
Meeting called to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall
, ITEM A M REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE/RECONSIDERA TION
, ,
"
Item #82 - lCont'd from 12/12/00) 3006 Gulf-ta-Bav Boulevard: Thanh Phuoc &
Kimtruc Thi Nguven - Owner! Aoolicant. Request flexible development approval to
permit a nightclub within the Commercial District with a reduction in required
, parkir')9 spaces from 20 spaces to 18 spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project with Comprehensive Landscape Program at Bay View City
Sub, Blk 8, Lots 8, 9, 1 0 ~ 1/2 of vac alloy on N less Rd. right-of-way on S.
Fl 00-08M33 '
ACTION - CONTINUED TO MARCH 20, 2001 MEETING M 7:0
. "
acd0201
1
02/20/01
ITEM B .' CONTINUED ITEMS
,::),
Item #B1 - 229 'and 301 South Gulfvlew Boulevard and 230, 300 and 304
Coronado Drive: Al-Navem International Inc. & Kandiah P. Thavabalasinqaml
Clearwater Seashell Resort LLC - Ownerl Aoolicant. Request flexible development
approval to: 1) increase height from 35 feet to 150 feet; 2) inc"rease from 65 rooms
to a minimum of 250 rooms and maximum of 300 rooms; 3) reduce front setback
along S. Gulfview Boulevard from 10 feet to zero feet; 4) reduce front setback
along Coronado Drive from 10 feet to. zero feet; 5t reduce side north setback from
10 feet to zero feet; and 6) reduce side south setback from 10 feet to zero feet.
Request review and recommendation to City Commission: 1) vacation of Third
Street right-at-way from S. Gulfview Boulevard to Coronado Drive; 2) vacation of
eastern 35 feet of S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way, from approximately 130 feet
north of the Third Street centerline street to approximately 1 50 feet south of Third
Street centerline, totaling approximately 250 linear feet of S. Gulfview Boulevard
right-of-way); and 3} development agreement between Clearwater Seashell Resort'
LLC and City as part of a Comprehensive' Infill Redevelopment Project at Uoyd-
White-Skinner Sub, Lots 57-59, 104~106 and part of Lots 56, 103 & 107.
('
u
ACTION - APPROVED ~ 5:0, subject to conditions: 1) This application will be
effective upon development agreement approval by the Commission; 2) the
Gultview Boulevard and Third Street rights-of way to be vacated by the
Commission; and
3) the final design of the building is to be consistent with the conceptual elevations
as submitted and/or modified by the COB.
Item #82 - (Cont'd from 12/12/00) 3006 GulfMto.Bav Boulev'ard: Thanh Phuoc &
Kimtruc Thi Nguven - Ownerl ADDUcant. Request flexible development approval to
permit a nightclub within the Commercial District and to reduce the required number
','
"I 'o' ~ . ': ~, . .
.'
i'\
of parking spaces from 20 to 18, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
with Comprehensive Landscape Program' at Bay View City Sub, Blk 8, Lots 8, 9, 10
& 1/2 of VBC alley on N less Rd. rlght~of-way on S. .
Fl OO~08M33
ACTION - CONTINUED - SeE" A"
"/ \
'"
.'
Item #83 - '(Cont'd from 01/23/01) - 222 Palm Island SW: Karl N. & Ginnv M.
Juhl/Mark Maconi Homes of Tampa Bav. Inc. - Owner/Aoolicant. Request flexible
development approval to reduce required north rear setback from 25 feet to 14 feet
aspart of Residential lnfill Project at Island Estates of Clearwater Unit 6-A, Lot 14.
FL 00-11-59
".,
, ,
I""
.. "
, '. T
acd0201
2
02/20/01
'.
.... ]
, ACTION - APPROVED - 7:0, subject to the condition that a buffer be provided
along the east and west property lines lhonoring the required view triangles)
capable of reaching and being maintained at a height of at least six-feet. '
':-'1'
'.,t'i.,.,
'I' .
"
~,~ -:
Item #84 - (Cont'd from 01123/01) - 731 Bavwav Boulevard: E & A. Inc./Louis ,
Anastasoooulos - Owner/ Aoolicant. Request flexible development approval to
permit a restaurant in the Tourist District, to reduce the front east setback from 10
feet to 1;6 feet along Clearwater Pass Avenue"and to reduce the .required number
of p'arking spaces from 105 to 74, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project ,at Bayside Shores, 81k C, Lots 1 thru 10. FL 00-11-49
,'~~
\r.<.'l~~ .
..Jd,&4
ACTION - APPROVED M 7:0, subject t'o conditions: 1) A final landscape plan which
exceeds the requirements of Code is submitted to and approved by Staff prior to
the issuance of any permits, and 2) all signage is brought into compliance with
Code prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Item #85 - (Cont'd from 01/23/01) - Text Amendment: Citv of Clearwater -
AooUcant. Request amendments to Community Development Code regarding
residential Infill projects, parking standards for self storago establishments, special
area plans governing development potential in Tourist District, docks, newsracks,
and an alternate member to the Community Development Board. TA 00-12-06
ACTION -APPROVED - 7:0
ITEM C - lEVEL TWO APPLICATION,S
Item He1 - 2408 Shellev Street: Wilfred & Muriel Pina - Owner/Aoplicant. Request
flexible development approval to reduce rear setback from 25 teet to zero feet as
part of Residentlallnfill Project ,at Gulf to Bay Acres 1 st Add, Blk E, Lot 13.
FL OOM10-45
::;;" "
.' .
;
ACTION' - APPROVED - 6:0, subject to conditions: 1) Any decking currently
encroaching into ,the west side setback (and five-foot drainage easement) be
removed prior to the issuance of any building permit and/or within one month of the
Community Development Board meeting on February 20, 2001, whichever occurs
,-f',
r., .
. ~ . , < .,' .' >) I ~
.~, . ,
" ,
~
,'.
" ,
(,
: ;.}
': .
(~~~ '
j',
, ,
" ,
"
\;)
first: 2) all required building permIts for the deck be secured within one month of
approval by the Community Development Board: 3) any decking be easily removable
to allow maintenance to the sea wall: 4) no opaque fence exceeding 36 Inches be
located within the rear ...yaterfront sight visibility triangle, Including the existing
fence; 5) no decking exceed 36 Inches in height be located within 10 feet of the
seawall: and 6) no decking span over or into the pond.
Item #C2 - 333 South Gulfview Boulevard: David R. Little (Barrv Barrinoer. dba Kev
Lama Bar & Grill) - Owner/ADPlicant. Request flexible development approval to
reduce east rear setback from 10 feet to zero feet and the north side setback from
J 0 feet to zero feet as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at
L1oyd-White~Skinner Sub, lot 67. FL 00-12-62
ACTION - APPROVED - 6:0, subject to condJtlons: 1) The refrigeration unit is to be
, screened with an enclosure that is architecturally-integrated with the style of the
eXisting building, with final materials and design to be approved by the planning
, dept; 2) the existing fence along the east (rear) property line be replaced with a
new, six-foot wood fence prior to issuance of a building permit (other than a fence
permit): 3) all proper permits and inspections for the refrigeration unit and the deck
be secured withhl one month of the community development board approval of this
application; 4) all outdoor storage be discontinued and removed prior to the
issua~ce of any building permits or within one month of the community
developm'ent board approval of this application, whichever is less: 5) all trash/debris
be removed alol1g the east property line prior 'to the issuance of any building permits
or within o'ne month of Community Development Board approval of this application,
whichever occurs first: and 6) the property be resurveyed and if it is determined
that the existing deck encroaches the Boldog property to the north, the ,
encroachment must be removed within 75 days of the Community Development
Board approval.
'tern #C3 - 623 Drew Street: Robert Schoeller - Owner/Apolicant. Request flexible
development approval to increase the height of a tower from 50 to 66 feet and to
reduce the number of required parking spaces from 91 to 21 as part of a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at Jone's Sub of Nicholson's Addition
to Clearwater Harbor, Blk7, Lots '-3. FL 00-11-57
ACTION - APPROVED ~6:0, subject to conditionG: 1) Trash collection facilities
are provided to the satisfaction of Solid Waste department and the design is
coordinated with the Planning Department: 2) in the event square footage that is
allocated for residential uses are converted into nonresidential uses the Planning
Department shall recalculated the parking requirement for the converted square
footage (the approximately 2,500 square feet of flex space to a gallery exempt) and
Code requir~ments must be met; 3) in the event the artist studio portion of the
building is converted into any other usa (including other types of retail) the Planning
Department shall recalculate the parking requirement for the converted square
footage and'the code requirements must be met; 4) an application for a building
permit be submitted for the drew street facade and that all outstanding code
violations be resolved within four months of the Community Development Board
, ,
acd0201
3
02/20/01
. . I
~
;\:,1, .
I'
I>:"
"'Cl I
.i "
t~(:)
'1:J,:.
".,' .
.!.'.
I,
1.,
I, '
'. ,
""";~
(~
; +.
, decision; 5) all outdoor storage and debris be removed 'prior to the issuance of any,
building permits or within two months, whichever is less; 6) outdoor storage of
materials be prohibited; i) all signage meet code and be architecturally integrated
into the design of the building; and 8) a minimum of a five-foot sidewalk be
provided on Jones street. '
, Item #C4 - 3070 Gulf-to-Bav Boulevard: RB-3 Associates. Randall Banderson 1993~
, Trust. and WR-' Associates - Owner/ ADolicant. Request flexible development
approval to provide direct access to a major arterial street for a proposed overnight
accommodation establishment, as part of a' Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project 5eo.'16-29-16, M&B 23.02. FlOO-12-64
ACTION - APPROVED - 6:0, subject to conditions: 1) Access be limited to right-
, . in/right-out on Gulf to Bay Boulevard with a raised, island, per FOOT requirements;' ,
':.2) a certificate at' occupancy for the hotel not be issued prior to FOOT's inspection
and approval of the raised safety island and traffic I'uprights"; 3) any proposed,
freestanding sign be limited to six feet in height above the finished grade of the
, front'line of the parcel unless part of a Comprehensive Sign Programl as required by
Code; and 4) all future access'to the outparcels be restricted to this single
driveway. Requests for an additional driveway for one or both outparcels will
require further review by the Planning Department and Community Development
Board.
ITEM 0 - lEVEL THREE APPLICATIONS
Item #01 - 160 North Belcher Road: H.G. Anderson/Citv of Clearwater ..
Owner/AoDlicant. Request annexation of 0.72 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to CG, Commercial General Classification and rezoning to C,
Commercial District at a portion of Section 13, Township 29 South, Rango 15 East, ,
M & B 11.03. ANX 01-12-01
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
Item #02 - 1305 Woodbine Street: Rosemarv Baker/Citv of Clearw~
"Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with 0 land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning t~ Low Medium Density
,Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 8, Block C, Pine Ridge Subdivision.
ANX 01-12-02
ACTION - WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT.
Item #03 -' 1734 Cardinal Drive: Phvliss Daliendo/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of 0.19 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
R~sidential (lMDR) district at Lot 6, Pinellas Terrace First Addition. 'ANX 01-12-03
ACTION - RECOMlVIENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
acd0201
4
02/20101
" .
. ' I~~ c'
',' j-...
, I
I
I
~
, !
I
, . ~., , : ,. ~. :-:~
~
,
,
,',
',)1>'
,
'. ,
,,"
~~ .
_I' ,.
:,"'1
" /.w)'
I '
, ~"l1'
'.
."
'.
~ . .
" '
. iJJ"
\ I <)
. ,c +
, ,
"
~ '\~ ,".. c " I
Item #04 - 1492 Carolvn Lane: Cleor~othor Grosfl1.C1tv of Clearwater -
Owner/Applicant. Request annexation of O. '18 lIere to tho City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and relonlng to Low Medium Density
Residential, (LMDR) dis~rlct at Lot 161 Terra-Alto Estotos. ~NX 01-12-04
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
Item #05 - 2827 St. John Drlvo: Joffroy DrurvlCllv Qf Cloarwater -
Owner/Applicant. Request annexation of 0.16 ocro to tho City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rozonlng to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 6, Block 0, Virginia Groves Terrace" Fifth
Addition. ANX 01-12-06
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. 6:0
, '
, Item #06 - 1754 West Mooor Avenue: Tlmothv Heuslnnor/Cltv of Clearwater '-
Owner/ApDlicant. Request annoxation of 0.19 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to ResidentIal Low and rozonlng to low Medium'Density
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 21, Clearwater Manor. ANX 01-12-06
ACTION - WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT.
Item #D7 - 1941 West Skvllno Drive: Gall LeBlonc/Cltv of Clearwater - ,
, Owner/ApDllcaD1. Requost annexotlon of 0.17 acro to the City with a land Use
PI,an Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium' Density
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 106, Skyline Groves. ANX 01M12~08
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROV At - 6:0
Item 1108 - 1309 WQodblno Street: Jamf)s Morrow/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/ADDUcant; Requost annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with a land Us'e
Plan Amendment. to Rosldentlal Low and re20nlng to Low MedhJm Density
Resldentlal,tLMORLdlstrlct at Lot 7, block C, Pine Ridge. ANX 01-12~09
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
lWm 1109 :... 108 K Suout: Michael ~tlfellCitv of Clearwater - Owner/ADDlicant.
Request annexation of 0.4 acro to the City with a land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential Urban and rezoning to low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)" district,
for Lots 23 & 24, Crystal Heights Unit 1, Including abutting K Street rjght-of~way.
ANX 01.12.12
ACTION -.RECOMMENDED APPROVAL ~ 6:0
'Item #010 - 161 ~ Owon Qrhre: JO,Gon Thacker/Citv of Clearwater - ,
9wner/ApDllcant. Roquoot annexation of 0.24 acre to tlie City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
acd0201
6
02/20/01
." ~':,. ..: j:,.
, ,AQk
> r.~.~
~ ' ....
" ,
:1"
:., " , .
. " ., ~
" ,e.
",'"
: ~": I .
,
". .
..\:
t. , ,
,
~ .
.!~t'~
:",!<lfl
I""
.f'L
"
. .
Residential (lMDR) district for a portion of Sflctlon 8, Township 29, South Runge
16 East, M&B 22.06. ANX O'.1~.'.a '
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
I
I
, I
Item #011 - 2839 St. JoJmj)rlvo: Whotsel WIllIlUD.ll~itv of Clearwater -
,Owner/ADolicant. Request annexation of 0.18 nere to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential low and rClonlng to Low Modlum Density
, Residential (lMDR) district for Lot 12, Block D, Vlrglnlo Groves Terrace Fifth
Addition. ANX 01~12.14
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL ~ 6:0
Item #012 - 1234 Bell Drive: Yvettes Lokls/Cltv of CI~arwoter - Owner/Aeolicant.
Request annexation of 0.34 acre to the City with 0 land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential Urban and rezoning to Low Modlum Density Residential (LMDR) district
at Lot 13, Canterbury Heights. ANX 01-12-' Q
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
Item #013 - 2176 NE Coachman Road: Suncoast Chrlst!t!(l School/Cltv of
Clearwater - OwnqrJAoelloan't. Request annexation of 0.39 acre to the City with a
land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban and rezoning to low Medium '
Density Residential (LMDR) district at a portion of Lot 8 of Mosell Acres
Subdivision. ANX 01-12-' Q
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. 6:0
Item #D 14 - 1919 Old CODQhll1an Road: Rotlor Sponcer/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/ADDUCtmt. Requ8st annexutlon of 0.21 acre to the City wjth a Land Use
Plan'Amendment to ,Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
, Residential (LMDR~ district for Lot 14 ond tho north one-half of Lot 16, Block A,
..' Sunset Point Estates. ANX 01-1CU
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. 6:0
Item #016 - 22996 US 19N: Sldnev Savelle/Ciw of Clearwater - Owner/Aoplicant.
Request annE.,(atlon of 0.61 acre to the City with 'a land Use Plan Amendment to
CG, Commercl,al General Classification and rozonlng to C, Commercial District at a
po'rtion of Section 8, -Township 29 South, Range 16, East, M&B 22.06.
ANX 01.12.18
ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. 6:0
. .
Item 11016 - 693 South Bolcher Rond: Scl EunerBI Service Florida/Cltv of
~JearwatQr - Owner/Aopllcant. Request annexation of 0.37 acre to the City with a
Land Use Plan Amendment to Rosldent/al Medium and rezoning to Medium Densitv
acd0201
6
02/20101
,\
~
. '.'
,\:: .:
. ~., .'
, , ;....-:\ ,. j ..... . '. I 'I"
. , ',c . . ~,'. .
\ to + ~. .
",
',1.
,,:"0"
, '
, ,
".' . :oy", '.
. . < '
'ResIdential (MDR) district for a portion of Section 18, Township 29 South, Range
16 East. ANX 01-12-'19
,
i
, I
l
!
I
I
I
I
I
':i".
ACTION ""': RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
~ . . .
i
Item #01 7 - 2824 St. John Drive: Mariam Johnson/City of Clearwater -
Owner/AoDlicant. Request annexation of 0.16 acre to the City with a land 'Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Urban and rezoning to low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district for Lot 2,' Block 8, Virginia Groves Terrace Fifth
A,ddition. ANX 01-12-20,
.. ,
,,'
:X..", :,
.}~. 'I ~ -.;
.~F~' :. ' "1 '
;~ j' .:
':.:,1:' .
';';11~/ .<
~Y:~(;" . .
~';".~ . .', '
~,,~.", .
~!1I;:,:::'" .
ft;.::,~:,,>,:. '
lr"l'IJ ".'
!/'.'" ,.I,' .
~\ ;.\~. '<'.: ~. ," , :
<~{;':. ;: I . , . c
,:\" ,
. ,:; ~'. .' . t ~ c .
.. . '.'" : ~ ." . \ ; . .
ACTION- RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
(tern #018 - 2841 SR 590:" Helen ElliotlCityof Clearwater - Owner/Aooli~ant. '
Request annexation of 0.28 acre to the City with a land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential Urban and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMO'R) district
, for Lots 3 a,nd 3A, Spring lake Estates.ANX 01-12-21
" ,
" ACTION - RECOMMENDED APPROVAL - 6:0
).> .
." .
'.' ~ . I
Item #D19 -2060 Calumet Street: Florida Graphics Supply & James Reynolds/City. : ,
, of Clearwater - Owner/Applicant. ,Request annexation of 0.18 'ac're to the City with
a Land Use Plan Amendment to IL, Ind,ustrial Limited Classification and rezoning to
IRT, In'dustrial, Research & Technology District for the South 235 feet of the East
152 feet of the West 465.88 feet of lot 9, Clearwater Industrial ,Park.
ANX 01-12-22
,. ~..
:::', ~~,
.l! :.. 'P
"
'~r.. :
~~! L <
5"\ ','
{:;~: "
.~.- ..
',1;\':, .
. ~ r.: ~.
ITEM E - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 01/2'3/01
ACTION - APPROVED 6:0
~fi:' .
ift,(:: '
t:~.. ',,' "
l,>,1
:!~';;~',' '
~;:; ~:', '
~'I' .
:>\~ ~ ;.~ '
"
~'. I ~,'
ITEM F - DIRECTORS ITEMS - NONE.
ITEM G - ADJOURNMENT - 6:30 p.m.
~ ",' I
r"
:}','
~..~.., .
.. '
:~. -: '. '.
". ", : ~ I
,.', .
"
. r;)t1i
'V
.,' . ,
, ,.
j ..:
, acd020 1 ..
7
02/20/01
~ .'.~ ,,'
. ......
" '
.
FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LO~AL PUBLIC OFFICERS
l^STN^~~;:S^ME-gbE;;~ . -1~ NC::OF OOA~D'Du;C~Ld;MI:::fIlORITY'OR COMMITlEE
': ~AIl.ING ADDRESS Till! 1l0ARU, COUNCil, COM MISS ON. AUTHORITY OR COMMITlEE 0"1
, ~ ~ ' I ( Wlllelll SERVF. IS A UNIT OF:
I ~ Y'l'i"" e:Lte.; 0 COUNTY 0 OTIl Ell. 1.0<'0\1. AGENCY
CITY,
()/~
--------------
/'lAM!: %f'OLlT/CAL SU9D1VISION:
C'/ ~ (' J.I A r"'" r
MY POSITION IS:
RRED
o EHeTIVE
~1'rOlNTl\'E
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the counly, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elect cd board,
council, commission, authority, or commillee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodics who are presented
with a voting connict of interest under Section 112.3143. Florida Statutcs.' " "
CE FORM 88.10-91
t'AG 1! I
Your responsihifit ics undcr lhe law when faced with a measure in which you havc a connict of interest will ~ary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. for this reason, please pay dose attention to the instrucrions on this form
before completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
".. .~\\ person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office M UST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure
'. ,.......f.'hich inures to hi~ 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 governmenJ agency) by whom he is re.tained (including the parent
organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he is retained); to Ihe 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 spccialtax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote 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-Jaw. and daughter-in-Jaw. A "business associale" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on ,n business
enterprise with the officer as II partner, joint venturer. cOOWner 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 situations described above. you must disclose the connic!:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nalure of your interest in lhe measure on
which you arc abstaining from voting; and '
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the pc~on responsible for
recording the minutes of the meeling, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting inthe siluations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However.
)'ou must disclose the nature of the connict before making any allempt to innuence the decision, whether orally or in wriling and
whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT 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
" J recording the minutes oethe meeting. who will incorporate the form in the minu(es.
, I .. 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 after the form is filed.
the person responsible for
f'\l) t\(. .---=7
.....1
".":. :.1./.... !~I\."I:.'., :~:\.'-: .~:.;'.}...~:..;..~~~':...-_~;,:.~~\:',...?/ '" ~:~..r,::~.;. I::.~~..~., l :.., , ':'j"'-', '.",+I~. '.' :.......~ ,.;1'.,<' .~.... :':'~'.~.
.~". ~~". ~~.. :.'.'. ..:~,'.~' :'.',l..~. .......: ....~ l~~"~"~""'~' ~":,:;., " 'I:'.:~.:~'..~ ._:.:" \"i'.:.~'<'. .':.>' "::'.-.";.;~' .:,....t,...~',." '~:',\'. ,,'~'" :'.,',; '~,'.>,"~'.':\.","'.,
IF y'OU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECH;JON EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
'. You must disclo5e orally the nature of your conOict in the measure before participating.
., You must complCle, the for~ and file it \Vitbin I ~ days after the vole occurs with tpe person responsible for recording the, minutes of i
the meeting, who must incorporate, the form in the minutes. A copy of lhe form must be provided imme.::liately to lh~;:r
members of the agency, and the form mus,t be read publicly a I the n:,xt,meeling after the form is lilcd.
'. . ,.. ....
\
. .
, i
I,
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S IhREST
, . hereby disclose that on ~ &,17/0/
, '
. ..
'..
(a) A measure cam~ 0 will come before my agency which (check one)
---..: inured to my special private gain;
'~ inured to the special ~in of my business associate,
~ inured~;~pecial, gain ormy relative~
-k.. ~ to t e special gain of z:;~ A4~t-k
. whom I am retained; or '
~ inured to the special gain of
is the parent o~ganization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
, by
. which
J .. a-cLJ-v ~ A,.
HJ()!~),~pr#
'J:L. u!Z 'f ~ Ii;- ~
~~7LH~1 .
("'"
., )
, .'
"
t/u,h!
Date Filed
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES g112.317 (1991), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED ..
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOllOW" "6-' ~
IMPEACHMENT. REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT. DEMOTION. REDUCTIOi~~ r
SALARY,REPRIMAND, OR A CIVil PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED SS,OOO.
CE FORM 8B ./0.91 PMlE 2
........ltr~~.. .'
~ . ~ i{ , : . I \ .' r.' ~ ,I' >"'! .." I \ I.. ~'.. >
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DEciSION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSJON AT THE MEETING:
· You must ~isc1ose orally the nature of your connict in th~ measure before participating.
, · You must complete the (on;n and file it wit bin 1$ days aflcr thc vote occurs with t.he person responsible for recording the minutes of
the meeting. who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form lnust be provided immcd ialely to the ,,~'~.::r
members of the agency. and the form must be read publicly at the n;xt fI'ccting after the form is filed. (
,
~ DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, -11", ~ ~ ,hereby disclose ,halon z..1Z-p /Il I
(a) A measure came o~1 come before my agency whieh (check one)
_ inured to my special private gain~ ,
~ inured to the special gain of my business associate,
-:-- inured~; special gain of my relative~
--k.. ~ to t e special gain of J)~ A/j..J
whom I am l'etained; 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 t~e nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
.""
. by
,which
J~O- cLJ-tL/~ A--.
rid- (~~), ~jff:tL7
J:L"~d. '- f:~;t- ~
~ ~ .7LH~c/
.. ,
(
o/z-a~ I
Date Filed
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317 (1991), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED,
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE,OF THE FOLLOW' ~;
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION. REDUCTIO)' I \-.(
SALAR Y. REPRIMAND. OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5.000.
,.CE FORM &0. .0.91
PAGE 2
., ~'n..""-""""+ :.
'.~,";' .' .'!'; \1 .;',~,~:-", ::':~.:~.,:' ',,"'If,. ".;. '':'>~~''''I'~I:-,:'''I~.~.'''1 ',: ,,'.', ""~~"M::" ....','..., ',:+'~:' ,\\", \}....:': ,,;','::'-:",4."',:.' ':.~".. :....~:,.':,.:....'
":~
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
February 20, 2001
Present:
Gerald Figurski
Edward Mazur, Jr.
David Gildersleeve
William Johnson
Shirley Moran
Carlen A. Petersen
, Alex Pliska
Chair - arrived 5:20 p.m.
Vice Chair
Board Member - departed 6:07 p.m.
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
,;
,
"
Also Present: Pamela Akin
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Ralph Stone
Cynthia Tarapani
Lisa L. Fierce' ,
Brenda Moses
City Attorney - departed 5:20 p.m.
Assistant City Attorney - arrived 5:20 p.m.
Planning Director '
Assistant, Planning Director
Development Review Manager
Board Reporter
"
::,.1 .,
'{:.,' ,
),
The Vice-Chair called the meeting to order at 1 :'04 p.m. at City Hall, followed
by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.
.w~'
''tntJ1
, ' To provide continuity for research, items are In agenda order although not
necessarily discussed In that order.
ITEM A - REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE/RECONSIDERATION
Item #82 - (Cont'd from 12/12/00) 3006 Gulf-lo-Bav Boulevard: Thanh Phuoc &
Kimtruc Thi Nauven - Owner/ Applicant. Request flexible development approval to
permit a nightclub within the Commercial District with a reduction in requir~d'
parking spaces from 20 spaces to ,18 spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project with Comprehensive Landscape Program at Bay View City
Sub, Blk 8, Lots 8,.9, 10 & 1/2 of vac alley on N less Rd. right-of-way on S.
FL 00-08-33
Development Review Manager Lisa Fierce stated the applicant had requested
a continuance.
Member Johnson moved to continue Item #82 to March 20, 2001. The
motion was duly,seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM B - CONTINUED ITEMS
'~
Item ..a81 - 229 and 301 South Gulfvlew' Boulevard and 230. 300 and 304
Cororusdo Drive: AI-Navem International Inc. & Kandiah P: Thavabalaslngam/
$:Iearwater Seashell Resort LLC - Owner/ Applicant. Request flexible development
approval to: 1) increase height from 35 feet to 160 feet; 2) increase from 65 rooms
to 260 rooms; 3) reduce front setback along S. Gulfview Boulevard from 10 feet to
,',
,
mcd0201
1
02/20/01 '
'/. .~ ~ '.. ~ ':.. . I ' ,~ :' . \, ~ :. I '. i, :, ~', '\' i,' , "i ,/ ~',' .' . ~ t.:' '.. ~ . .:- ,'. ;'.' I : . .' '.~' .' - . ~ . .:'!:. ," .'. '> .: : . .'.,~ ~: ..:.: .' '. ';.. . II, r'. t. , ~ ':~ . '''': .:.' , ~ .,: '.' .. ~': r' .': .. '.. ..
~
zero feet; 4) reduce front setback along Coronado Drivo from 10 feet to zero feet;
5) reduce side north setback from 10 feet to zero feet; and 6) reduce side south
setback from 10 feet to zero feet. 'Request review and recommendation to City
Commission: 1) vacation of Third Street right-of-way from S. Gulfviow Boulevard to
Coronado Drive; 2) vacation of eastern 35 feet of S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of-
way, from approximately 130 feet north of the Third Street centerline street to
approximately 150 feet south of Third Street centerline, totaling approximately 250
linear feet of S. Gulfvlew Boulevard right-of-way); and 3) development agreement
between Clearwater Seashell Resort LLC and City as part of a, Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project at IJoyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lots 57-59, 104-106 and part
of Lots 56, 103 & 107.
Member Mazur reported he had a conflict of interest and left the dais.
mcd0201
2
02/20101
Member Johnson moved to nominate Member Gildersleeve as alternate chair
for Item #B 1. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. :
,i
Gordon Schiff, representative for A.P. Mar, Inc., (d.b.a. Port Vue), Antoni~s
Markopoulos, (d.b.a. Days Inn), Kolossos Inn, Inc., (d.b.a. Beach Towers), T.M.
,Magas, L.C.C., 'd.b.a. SpyGlass), and T.M. Megas, L.C.C. (d.b.a. Golden Beach),
requested this hearing be cancelled for the following reasons: 1) Notice of public
, hearings is a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite; 2) the hearing has been
, improperly and deficiently noticed because the project concerns land not included in
the application and not.included in the notice and advertisement for the hearings; 3)
, the applicant and the City have not complied with all notice requirements under the
Code, including, but not limited to, not including land which is part of the project
area;,4) owners and other property owners will be prejudiced by the failure to
strictly comply with all notice requirements, including but not limited to, having
insufficient time to prepare and fUlly participate in the hearings; 5) if the board goes
forward with the hearings, its actions will be void; and 6) owners expressly do not
waive their objections to the notice by appearing at the hearing and participating in
the event this motion is not granted.
, 1>1")
, ,
': ~~J'l.i,
City Attorney Pam Akin stated she had reviewed Mr. Schiff's motion/request
to cancel the hearing and recommended the COB (Community Development Board)
move forward with the hearing. She said if there is a notice defect, Mr. Schiff can
appeal to the courts.
, \
Planning Director Ralph Stone said this is a significant case, the first one
following on the heels of the COB's review of the Beach by Design plan. The
Commission approved the Beach by Design plan. It will now go to the PPC (Pinellas
Planning Council) and the Board of County Commissioners for approval. This
propos'al takes advantage of some of the elements in Beach by Desi,gn, such as
redevelopment of South Gulfview, the development of a pUblic sector improvement
known as the beachw'alk, and the creation of a resort bonus pool of units. There
are a number of conditions that must first be satisfied in conjunction with the site
, plan and the development agreement. The Comprehensive Plans addresses the
need for flexibility in development regulations, the need for redevelopment at the
~'"
. . . ~
"
,1..,,:,\; .........;'.,.. .:.:~I/';":.~.\.....: .~..;.:.:,t...l.......::r.,t. "~:.: ~.~.. ~tf'.", ..~..' .." "::". "'~::
,~
beach and in downtown, and sensitivity to the tourism economy with regard to the
City's future overall health. Staff foels this application is timely.
Development Review Manager Lisa Fierce reviewed the requests.
This case was continued at the January 31, 2001 special meeting of the
COB (Community Development Board) due to Irregularities in sending legal notice to
surrounding properties. Notices have been sent regarding the new meeting date.
"
"
The 1 .63-acre site, fronting South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive,
straddles Third Street and includes a portion of the east half of the South Gulfview
Boulevard right-of-way and Third Street right-of-way between South Gulfview
Boulevard and Coronado Drive. The site features the Glass House Motel and Beach
PJace Motel at 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard, and a single-family dwelling
and outbuildings at 300 Coronado Drive. The motels, built between 1 941 and
1956, have a total of 66 rooms. The redevelopment project will raze all onsite
structures.
" I'..,).
, ,
',' ..~'
The City has identified this site as a priority candidate for beach
redevelopment and ,revitaliz~tion. This area has many old, modest hotels and
motels and retail businesses in 'mid-rise buildings. Redevelopment requires the
assembly of land sufficient to develop signature buildings with on-site amenities and
adequate off-street parking. The site is'in the Beach by Design Plan's Beach Walk
Dist~ict, the primary beachfront destination on Clearwater beach. To stimulate
redevelopment of area property and to position the beach as a first-rate tourist ,
venu~, 'the Plan recommends redevelopment, realigning S. Gulfview Boulevard into a
beachfront promenade; and removing most surface parking west of the road. To
assist in transforming the beach into a quality family resort, Beach by Design
establishes a density pool of 600 additional hotel roems in key locations, available
'for five years following designation of the' beach as a Community Redevelopment
District, pursuant to Countywide rules.
, , '
The applicant wishes to use 1B3 rooms of the density pool. Beach by
Design guidelines are addressed. Beach by Design was approved by the
Commission on February 16, 2001,
The proposal consolidates small parcels into a redevelopment site. The
project is a 260-room, full-service" upscale hotel with a health club and pool,
banquet facilities, restaurants, and retaillJses. Rooms will range from standard to
luxury suites with kitchenettes. Same rooms will have private lanais. The hoteJ will,
sit atop an BOO-space parking garage. While Code requires 260 parking spaces, the
, garage will provide 1 60 additional spaces for hotel use. The remaining 400 spaces
will be 'available for public use. As part of Beach by Design, a portion of the public
parking lot west of South Gulfview Boulevard will be removed.
u
The project's design Includes two towers separated by a 100.foot center
span. The 14-floor building will measure 150 feet to the top of the principal roof
structure from the base flood elevation and will include six levels of parking and
mcd0201
3
'02/20/01
""" '.. 0".. . ~. > ' . . : ," '.' .
< . '\'+ 11 ~j .'.
,', ,.'1,
.' . ~ .
,"
~
seven levels of hotel rooms. The building will have two front doors: 1) a formal
entrance front view on Coronado Drive and 2) beach entrance on S. Gulfvlew
Boulevard to il')clude colonnade elements with arches and canopies. Proposed
materials will be stucco, polished stone, and a barrel~tlle roof. The design steps
back as the elevation increases, creating Interesting elevations along the skyline.
Balconies on the west elevation will overlook the Gulf of Mexico. The building's
design will camouflage the multiple levels of structured parking and hide It trom
beach-goers' views. A pedestrian overpass will extend from hotel's second story,
across the promenade and relocated South Gulfview Boulevard, to the beach.
.,:, I
The proposal implements beach walk improvements as outlined In Beach by
Design, to include substantial landscaping, a circulation program that establishes a
new deslgn'for S. Gulfview Boulevard, and specialized plantlngs in place of a
portion of the public parking lot. In front of the project, a promenade will be
established in the right-of-way of S. Gulfview Boulevard that ,incorporates pavers,
street trees, lighting and other amenities to integrate activity with the building
fac;:ade and enhance the pedestrian experience. Trees will be plan'ted on S.
Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive. The pool deck also will be landscaped
, ' with" tree wells and planters.
.,~)
,''--I,}Il'
This application for Flexible Development approval is part of a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project and requests to increase the height
from 35 feet' to 150 feet, increase the number of rooms from 65 rooms to 250
rooms, reduce the front setback along South Gulfvlew Boulevard from 10 feet to
zero feat, reduce the front setback along Coronado Drive from 10 feet to zero feet,
reduce the north side setback from 10 feet to zero feet, and reduce the south side
setback from 10 feet to zero feet.
mcd0201
4
02/20101
, .
The height increase is consistent with Beach by Design recommendations
because it provides for an increase in density, separate towers by 100 feet, and
includes a floorplate higher than 45 feet for public parking. The reduction In side
and front setbacks is needed for on-site circulation and includes the dedication of
10 feet of "right-of.~way along Coronado Avenue. The increase in density uses the
, density pool. The proposal meets the 14 criteria outlined by Beach by Design,
including a minlmllm of 200 hotel rooms, full range of amenities, access to rooms
via lobbies/corridors, a national marketing affiliation, trip generation management
, enforceable by covenant, mandatory hurricane evacuation, maximum of 25 percent
of rDoms with kitchen facilities,' exceptional architectural design and finishes,
frontage on the Gulf of Mexico, minimum lot size of one acre, existing property with
obsolete structures, Tourist District zoning with eligibility to increase height to 150
feet, proylsion of benefits to the City, and obligation to participate In future
assessment program.
~
The site's current structures are served by S. Gulfview Boulevard and
Coronado Drive. South Gulfvlew Boulevard, which will provide ingress and egress
to the parking structure only, operates at a LOS (Level of Service) "0." Full access
, wilt be provided along Coronado Drive. The traffic impact assessment performed by
King Engineering Associates, anticipates project traffic will split between Coronado
\.
Drive and South Gulfview Boulevard at a 40:60 ratio. The traffic study concludes
the project Is not expected to degrade the LOS along South Gulfvlew Boulevard, ,
Coronado Drive, or surrounding roads.
"~
r .'"
, The proposal anticipates vacation of the eastern portion of Gulfview
Boulevard, beginning approximately 130 feet north of the centerline of Third Street
and ending approximately 150 feet south of the centerline of Third Street, and the
vacation of Third Street from Coronado Drive to South Gulfvlew Boulevard. As
, proposed in Beach by Design, South Gulfview Boulevard will be relocated, west as
'part of a serpentine, beachwalk design that will include a two-way, two-lane road
section, pedestrian way, and bicycle path. The proposal also includes the
dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along Coronado Drive. Staff recommends a
condition of approval relate to these vacation actions.
,..Y.J
I
'''.:1'
The proposal also requests recommendation to the City Commission of a
development agreement that establishes public/private obligations. The City
recognizes the economic and aesthetic benefits that will result from private
development. The applicant also recognizes the benefit of public improvements that
directly affect the marketability of the project and the character of the general area
surrounding the project. The development agreement, in summary, requires the
, applicant to construct a minimum 250-room hotel and BOO-space parking garage
with 400 public spaces and to provide "up-front" financing for the Beachwalk
project and relocat,ed South Gulfview Boulevard, generally between the south beach
concession structure and First Street. The City will process the vacation requests
of both Third Street and South Gulfview Boulevard, between the Pier 60 parking lot
and public parking lot north of the Adam's Mark resort, provide units from the
resort units bonus pool, and reimburse the applicant for public improvements from
ad valorem revenue and other pUblic revenues generated by the project beyond
,existing revenue levels.
" '
.J ~
t'
mcd0201 '
6
02/20/01
The DRC (Development Review Committee) reviewed the application and
supporting materials on January 19, 2001. Staff recommends approval with three
conditions.
~
Mr. Stone summarized the key points of the development agreement. The
developer is proposing a 250-room resort facility, with a minimum of no less than
750parking spaces, 400 of which would be dedicated to public use, and the
, remainder dedicated for the developer's use. The developer is proposing to provide
100% of their pro-rated costs of the overall costs of the Beachwalk and South
Gulfview reconfiguration based on their frontage versus the linear total of the
project. The applicant will provide up-front financing for the same improvements
between the south beach concession structure and First Street to the south beach
Pavilion. The applicant would be reimbursed over a period of time up to 26 years
, from sources limited to the Incremental increase In their ad valorem and utility
taxes; The extent of whIch those revenues could be applied would be no more than,
60%. The City has the option of buying out both the parking garage public spaces
in the first 6 years, or building a competing garage within a quarter mile.
\ ...~ ".~..."~ 'lo,. I :..'~: <'l":":"""~ ,'t-. :..:'\~,.,rl.~',.,..~.r...::.'" '~"'<.'I" .+~. . .,.~-;""..":.~;~...,'..,:,:.'" 4:.... :....~/I '".:.::.. ':11, .....
~
,
In response toa question, Mr. Stone said when South Gulfview is redesigned
and moved west, Coronado would become 3 lanes and South GiJlfview would
become 2 lanes. He said staff will be challenged to determine the timing of
, improvements on ,South Gulfview and Coronado to accommodate parking at the,
beach. ' There is a conceptual footprint for the reconfiguratlon of South Gultview
and the Beachwalk, but no final designs. Now that the Commission has approved
Beach by Design, staff can move forward with analyzing the detailed designs for'
South Gulfview and the Beachwalk.
..
Mr. Schiff said if the COB proceeds with this case, he would ask for party
status, file objections, and request the opportunity to cross~examine the applicant's
representative. He also expressed concern that certain events such as road
vac,atlons, etc. have nof occurred, and felt the process was out of order.
City Attorney Pam ~kin said,the'slte plan approval and the COB's
recommendation will be contingent upon the subsequent action required by the
Commission. '
~\\
~~~1lJ
, Bill Kimpton, applicant's representative and principal, said this property has
been under contract since .1999. This application was initially brought to the City
as an alternative to "Pier 60,plus" incorporating some neighbors' and, some of the
City's property. Once presented to the City, it was felt the project was a viable
alternative, and the applicant has been pursuing it since that time. A 6-month delay
. was realized due to downtown redevelopment proposals. He said this project would
be completed in line with the City's plan to redevelop the beach and within the
timeframe of completion of the new bridge.
mcd0201
6
, 02/20/01
It',
Richard Gehring, consultant, said this is a catalytic project for the beach and
the City overall. He presented a conceptual design of the resort hotel, conference
center, parking system, and other amenities. He said the City would not be,
required to subsidize the parking garage. He felt this project would stimulate
redevelopment, bring a quality design, create a great destination, and revitalize
tourism. He said this project is sensitive to the 2 adjacent property owners that
also' are pursuing development. This plan would separate the Marriott Seashell and
the Markopoulos project by a 60 to 70 foot right~of-way. He said the annual
economic impact of the project is over $1.2 million with more than 250 to 300
, additional job opportunities. The character and quality of this urban structure would
rejuvenate South Gulfview. In response to a question, Mr. Gehring said the Marriott
is in the process of reviewing designs and the approval process is underway. He
said the Kimpton team Is in an exclusive relationship with the Marriott. Specific
issues and concerns are being addressed with City staff.
,/
, ,
"
Ic' .
:.:. :~.
" ,
"
,
i.,,\ia
."
John Nichols, architect, said the Marriott is excited about this proposal. His
'firm has been Involved in many major hotel and oceanfront projects. He said this
project takes the spirit of Beach by Design and incorporates It Into a project that will
greatly benefit the City. He referred to a conceptual design of the project and "
reviewed the design and amenities. The parking garage would be built behind the
fac;:ade of the building. The roadway under the building includes a right-in, right-out,
i',
.I:'~"':"lt,:.d.';;.'..~ l'i.II'::'~r::l:~' ~ .~\~ H' "",::.;.\~..;,.'t.j,I' )1.... ~,~ .:,.':,~. ',.1.,",:("7;-"".", .' '.'"1 J'_...~......... I
~
~ '
" '
I ,
~Qi"}
I.' .1t
..\~~
'.
, '(jj
I,
t,
~ : :
access and will include proper signage. Concern was expressed that the front of
the building will have a zero setback; Mr. Stone said the Beach'by Design
document anticipates zero setbacks in the downtown and tourist districts. Every
flexible use has the option, abRent the infill process, of zero setbacks on all four
sides. Specific standards address those setbacks.
Member Petersen moved to recognized Gordon Schiff as the representative
for Mr. Markopoulos and grant him party status. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously. '
, ,
Mr. Gehring reviewed the economic impacts of the project and the project
team. He said the key to this project is the quality of project than can be delivered.
Staff is working with the Kimpton team to complete the development agreement.
He thanked Clearwater for the opportunity to prOVide an outstanding project.
In response to questions from Mr. Schiff, Mr. Nichols said he is not an
appraiser or economist, and has not received training in marketing research. He
said the building is proposed to be 85 feet high and meets the minimum flood
criteria. H'e is aware of the Beach by Design standards regarding the design of
building as it pertains to height and light, air, and view corridors. He said this
building adheres'to the light, view, 'and air guidelines. The project is broken into
towers with the parking garage hehind the fac;:ade. He said there would be a,30-
foot wide open section from Coronado to Gulfview. The proposal provides for
elimination of Third Street. Mr. Nichols said the proposed structure is residential in
its architectural character and mid-rise residential in scale in terms of multifamily
residential structure.
In response to q~estion from Mr. Schiff, Ms. Fierce said the staff report is a
combination of the Planning Department staff and Development Review Committee '
membersl efforts. She said she was'unsure of everyone's qualifications regarding
economic development matters. Staff historically looks at current property values
and how the proposal will improve the value of surrounding properties. She is not a
. licensed appraiser or market analyst, and did not know if other staff had those
qualifications. She said it is the applicant's responsibility to provide information
regarding their adherence to the standards in the Code. Ms. Fierce said she has
met with Mr. Gehring on 2 occasions regarding whether his proposal met the
requirements in Beach by Design. She did not know if he was, a consultant to the
City.
In response to questions from Mr. Schiff, Planning Director Ralph Stone said
he does not interpret that every criteria in the Code has to be met; it requires some
balancing. He said If the Code states that all criteria had to be met, he would be
required to follow it. The option regarding zero setbacks In the Community ,
Development Code is not guaranteed. The Code states the applicant must address
all criteria. Staff has anticipated common wall construction,with respect to Mr.
Schiff's property. The Code accommodates common wall construction. Staff has
reviewed some of Mr. Schiffs client's proposals. Mr. Schiff said none of those
proposals are relevant in this hearing because no application Is pending for any
mcd0201
02/20101
7
~
'"
""''''',
~~..."c~
~
. "
. ~. ..
projects by his client. Mr. Stone said if he did not consider Mr. Schiff's client's
plans, the Commission would express their concern. The plans being referred to
today are the proposals that were submitted to the Commission. He said it is
common to have discussion with contiguous property owners whether or not they
submitted an application. 'Although they were not submitted in a formal application
to the City, there have been discussions with the City regarding alternatives of
development agreements based on those alternatives. The alternatives have baen
proposed to the City in public hearings regarding beach development. Those plans
'do not restrict Mr. Schiff's client from applying fo'r another project. Mr. Schiff said
he felt ~he issue of presenting evidence regarding his client's property is irrelevant.
He said testimony has been heard on a project that has no status. He said all the
evidence presented today is irrelevant to this proceeding.
In response to questions from Mr. Schiff, Mr. Gehring said'the Kimpton
group has an agreement of exclusivity to pursue Marriott's operating relationship.
Details of operating agreem~nts are in negotiations. Mr. Gehring said he is a
community planner and developer with 25 years of experience in planning and
delivering millions of dollars worth of product and projects but" does not function as
a professio'nal appraiser or market analyst. He analyzes markets for pr~jects with
which he is involved. In response to a question, Mr. Gehring said the parking
garage would be "screened" from beachgoers, not "qamouflaged". The conditions
on the abutting sides have Code constraints that alloW only certain materials to be
'used on an abutting edge. He referred to the north elevation of the project. Mr.
Gehring said he is a participant in the project. His client has requested the vacation
of Third Street and the request has been part of the numerous public hearings held
on Beach by Design. He said the proposed parking garage configuration requires
zero side setbacks. The intentions of Beach by Design which define in their
structure an intent for an urban tourist district and provides for zero setbacks. In
response to a question, Mr. Gehring said this property is under contract and is
approximately 1.63 acres. The subject site with 280 feet of frontage on Gulfview,
306 feet of frontage on Coronado, 245 feet of depth between block face to block
face with the vacation of 35 feet of Gulfview produces a 1.63 acre site, which in
urban characteristics is developed as appropriate in character and scale to the urban
intensity of the tourist district the City has defined in Beach by Design. The 1 50-
foot height is used only on Coronado frontage. There is significant air and light on
all occupiable portions of the structure. The parking deck would run lot line to lot ,
line to accommodate the demands of both the City and the public. Mr. Gehring felt
the proposal is an acceptable trade off in delivering a quality hotel with a quality
parking facility on this site. He felt it is not an intensification unlike the
characterization of the commercial quality of Clearwater beach defined in Beach by
"Design or in either of Mr. Schiff's client's informal applications. Hesaid the parking
deek is compatible with Mr. Schiff's informal proposal for a parking deck. In r
response to questions, Mr. Gehring said he has been employed by the City
, numerous times in other capacities. He has not been employed by the City in any
capacity regarding Beach by Design or regarding any beach standards. He has had
no consulting contracts with the City during the past year.
The meeting recessed from 3:36 to 3:48 p.m.
medD201
8
02/20101
~
Mr. Schiff said the CDS does not have the authority to grant a site plan on
property that has not been part of an application. He said there is no existing
Community Redevelopment District and that this project is being reviewed in the
context of an assumption that a Community Redevelopment District would be
,established to allow for consideration of this project. He said this application is
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Countywide Plan. He submitted a
list of due process concerns.' Sufficient time for the public and his client has not
been provided and violates his client's due process and equal protection rights. Any
materials that were submitted by staff or that are part of the application today did
not provide sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard to his client. He said the
applicant under Code has the burden to establish that every single criteria must tie
met by competent substantial evidence. He said the record is devoid of any
competent evidence to grant the' approvals requested, therefore the applicant has
not carried his burden. Wlien an applicant utilizes 55% of its project from public
lands or variances, the project does not fit the property. '
mcd0201
9
02/20/01
Ethel Hammer, Engelhardt, Hammer & Associates, confirmed her credentials.
She said the applicant's proposal is incompatible with adjacent properties,
negatively impacts the future development potential of adjacent properties whether
existing or future, is to, intensive for the size of the property, sets a negative
precedent for future development proposals on Clearwater beach, and does not
belong on a 1.6 acre parcel of land after vacations are completed.
"'''4;:;
"'..,:)
, Mr. Schiff said the applicant has admitted the project cannot meet the
standard required for the project with regard to the standard that no more than
60% of the theoretical maximum building envelope can be located above 42 feet
and be occupied by a building.
Michael McElveen, Urban Economics Incorporated, said he is a State general
certified real estate appraiser. He said this project does not comply with standard
#2 of the general applicability standards and the general standards of
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. The project is not to reduce the fair
market value of abutting properties. He expressed concern regarding the height of
this project, its effect on development, the zero setbacks, the lack of air, light, and
view corridors, and lack of spacing of towers. He felt the project is impractical on
the subject site as it requires deviations from the intensity and development
standards. Adjoining properties will suffer a loss in values. He said adjoining
property owners' use would be diminished because of this project. Proper scales,
heights, and setbacks would improve this subject site's value.
~
Mr. Schiff referred to graphics of his client's property and the applicant's
property at various viewpoints. He said if only one criteria has not been met in the
Code, the application should be denied. He felt the proposed project is too large for
the parcel with too many towers. He said a similar request from a property owner
that requested elimination of side setbacks was denied based upon the project being
too intensive. He requested the CDS take judIcial notice of the Comprehensive
'......, './ """,~",': , 'l'~ .':I'.I.":~ .,:.' "..\., '," "1" .' .;~ ',.1 ~_':,., .~.. ..... ': 'I'; "':" ",:'~ ,\,~',.r.'.', ">:~:". ,.~. ' '."',' :., :.....\...,'..:'~_...,'~
~
Plan', the Code, Beach by Design standards', the Countywide Plan, and other
pertinen't regulations. '
Concern was expressed that Mr. Schiff's client had not expressed opposition
at any of the approximately 11 public hearings held on Beach by Design and this
proposal. Mr. ,Schiff said this is the first public hearing on this request for which
the COB is being asked to make a decision on this application.
, In response to a question, Mr. McElveen said it'the applicant complied with
setbacks and reduced the height of this project, there would be less of an impact on
adjacent property owners.. He said the issue is the marginal impact on value.
In response to a question, Ms. Hammer said Mr. Markopoulos' property is
3.5 acres and the subject property is much less. There is more opportunity to
create some distance on the ~arkopoulos property with respect to towers, etc.
::.
Mr. Schiff said the point of Beach by Design is not to treat projects on an
individual basis. This project did not consider compatibility with existing or with
future developments. He felt his client also should have an opportunity to avail
,himself of Beach by Design standards. This project will hurt his client in its current
design.
"
In response to questions from Mr. Stone, Ms. Hammer confirmed her office
is in Tampa. She said the general economic climate over the past decade in the
Tampa Bay area has been very good. She said she is not an appraiser but is familiar,
with the general area. She said she has not had the opportunity to administer a
redevelopment or special area plan. Ms. Hammer agreed that in the decade of the
1990's during a period of the highest economic climate and the lowest interest
rates, nothing of substance has occurred on Clearwater beach. Mr. Stone said a
findings and assessment report done by Anne O'Neil of Anne O'Neil & Associates,
concluded that Clearwater beach met the criteria for a slum and blighted area. In
response to' a question, Ms. Hammer said under that type of economic climate,
frequently the solution to that condition is a new project. Ms. Hammer said she is
not opposed to the project or the concept of a new hotel, but is suggesting the
project as designed is not appropriate for this location. Ms. Hammer agreed that in
a blighted area with an economic condition of no new investment, the normal
planning response is some type of special area plan or technique to change that
condition. Mr. Stone said the City has engaged Charlie Siemon,of Siemon and
Larsen to address those conditions. Ms. Hammer said she had the opportunity to
review the special area plan and is aware of how Mr. Siemon defined the
geographic areas and how the scale and development of each area is treated. She
said Mr. Siemon proposes the area in the Gulfview corridor as an area proposed for
more'intensive scale development, but he also states it must be in scale and
harmony with the surrounding area and most importantly states it should preserve ,
the light, air, and view corridors. Mr. Stone said Mr. Siemon has defined some
incentives in that area intended to change the climate particularly in the case of a
special unit pool. The minimum site size permitted for the use ot the pool is one
acre., The subject'site including the right-at-way is 1.63 acres. In response to a
r>%;)
....\.,j"~
:1
~'
mcd0201
10
02/20101
~
,"<7;;':)
tid~~
A'.;.":~
~
"\:
'..' . .
,;',,-'.:.' .
question, Ms. Hammer agreed the site exceeds the minimum size of density as
prescribed by Mr. Siemon. Mr. Stone said a height of up to 150 feet is allowed in
this area. Mr. Stone said the normal context of the application of the specific
development regulations that have stacked up through a zoning code to a special
area plan to a comprehensive plan normally result in a set of regulations that are in
a sense customized. They are not the types of regulations that normally apply to a
healthy environment, otherwise they would not be necessary. Ms. Hammer said
none of those policies and goals are in conflict with anything she has stated. She
said the Comprehensive Plan is to be considered as a total document therefore' all
policies must be considered. She sai,d this project is inconsistent with policies
dealing with compatibility with surrounding properties. ' '
, Mr. Schiff continued to object to the relevancy of Mr. Stone's statement
regarding the City's goals, as there is no existing Community Redevelopment
, District. ,
, '
In response to questions from Mr. Gehring, Ms. Hammer said as a
comprehensive planner, she has not prepared any plans under the City's new Code
, structure or under Beach by Design within the past 2 years. Mr. Gehring said the
, 250-room hotel with a quality flag and a public parking deck available to the public
pro~ides benefit. Ms. Hammer said she has no problem with that concept but her
concern is with the specific design. Mr. Gehring said du'ring his graphic analysis, he
referred to the Markopoufos proposal as presented to the public and Mr. Schiff
continuously objected, although Ms. Hammer presented a hypothetical condition,
including a'comparison of the two proposals. Ms.. Hammer said her intent was to
show the juxtaposition of the scale, bulk, and intensity of both projects should they
both include zero setbacks. In response to a question, Ms. Hammer said the criteria
in the Code does not speak to off-site improvements; it speaks to what takes place
within the boundaries of the project and can be evaluated. She said the intent of
open space and impervious surface ratios are meant to be within a project. She
said mitigation done in the public right-of-way does not speak to the intensity of the
site, but mitigates the existing conditions. In response to a question, she said she
did not see the relevancy of the DRI maximum of 350 rooms as her client's property
is more than twice as large as the applicant's property. Mr. Gehring said the
density of this application' is in the range of what has been shown by the
MarkopouJos group. Ms. Hammer said her client has proposed nothing in official
records and the application is yet to be determined.
In response to questions from Mr. Gehring, Mr. McElveen said he is not
educated In the ~isciplines of planning, land use control mechanisms, setbacks, etc.
Mr. McElveen said there is no question that a $65 million project is a benefit, but it
would more of a benefit were it built within the existing Code. A reduction of air,
light, and,view is a reduction in value. He said he could not place a corresponding
value on the proposed project if it were approved. Mr. Schiff said his client owns
all the abutting properties to the north of the subject site, has assembled 4 different
properties, and expects to devel~p them under the Seach by Design criteria at some
point in the future.
mcd020 1
11
02/20/01
~
"
: I
t.
';
\h,'
,I
ill-1'~\.
'"+.~iJ'
"
"' ' .
~,
" ,
Mr. Gehring said the applicant's first draft development agreement was
prepared in March 2000 and was fully disclosed to the public regarding the scale
and design of this project. He said Mr. Schiffs client had prior substantive
knowledge of the scale, character, and intensity of this project. Mr. Schiff objected
to the relevancy of Mr. Gehring's testimony.
Four persons spoke regarding the application.
Mr. Stone said development regulations have anticipated zero setbacks, etc.
prior to Beach by Design. This project will ad value to the beach, adds public
parking and removes it from dry sand, has been done in a sensitive manner, and
meets the design guidelines,' the criteria in Beach by Design, and the Comprehensive
, Plan ,regulations.
Mr. Gehring said the area is in a blighted condition. He felt his client is
providing a fair deal that balances development and benefits the public. Numerous
public hearings have been held regarding this project. He requested the project
move forward as th~ timing of some issues are critical. '
,The Chair thanked everyone for their cooperativeness in the process.
, In response to a question, Ms. Akin said the proposed vacation does not
violate the City Charter. She said that issue will be addressed by the City
Commission.
Member Johnson moved to approve the flexible development request to: 1)
increase height from 35 feet to 150 feet; 2) increase from 65 rooms to 250 rooms;
3) reduce front setback along S. Gulfview Boulevard from 10 feet to zero feet; 4)
reduce, front setback along Coronado Drive from 10 feet to zero feet; 5) reduce side
north setback from 10 feet to zero feet; 6) reduce side south setback from 10 feet
to zero feet; AND recommend City Commission approval of: 11 vacation of Third
Street right-of-way from S. Gulfview Boulevard to Coronado Drive and 2) vacation
of eastern 35 feet of 5. Gulfview' Boulevard right-of-way, from approximately 130
feet north of the Third Street centerline street to approximately 1 50 feet south of
, Third Street centerline, to'taling approximately 250 linear feet of S. Gulfview
Boulevard right-of-way at L1oyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lots 57-59, 104-106 and part
of Lots 56, 103 & 1 07 with conditions: 1) This application to be effective upon City
Commission approval of development agreement; 2) City Commission approval
required of vacation of Gulfview Boulevard and Third Street rights-of way; and 3)
fimil design of building to be consistent with conceptual elevations as submitted to
" and/or modified by the COB, The motton was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Member Johnson moved to recommend the City Commission approve the
development agreement between Clearwater Seashell Resort LLC and City as part
of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at L1oyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lots
57-69, 104-106 and part of Lots 56,103 & 107. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
mcd0201
12
02/20101
~
,-
(
. "
:~ I .
"
"
The meeting recessed from 6: 16 to 5:22 p.m.
Chair Figurski thanked Member Johnson for his service on the CDS and
presented him with a pl~que.
Item ,#82 - (Cont'd from 12/12/00) 3006 Gulf-to-Bav Boulevard: Thanh Phuoc &
Kimtruc Thi Nguven - Owner/ ADDlicant. Request flexible development approval to
, permit a nightclub within the Commercial District and to reduce the required number
of parking spaces from 20 to 18, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
with Comprehensive Land~cape Program at Bay View City Sub, Blk 8, Lots 8, 9, 10
& 1/2 of vac alley on Niess Rd. right-of-way on S.
FL 00-08-33
See Item A.
Item #83 - (Cont'd from 01/23/01) - 222 Palm Island SW: Karl N. & Ginny M.
Juhl/Mark Maconi Homes of TamDa Bav, Inc. - Owner/Apolicant. Request flexible
development approval to reduce required 'north rear setback from 25 feet to 14 feet
as part of Residential Infill Project at Island Estates of Clearwater Unit B-A, Lot 14.
FL 00-' 1-59
Planner Mark T. Parry reviewed the request. The 0.22-acre waterfront
,M~ property, on the nortl1 side of Palm Island SW, is west of Island Way in the Island
I"'J# Estates subdivision. The site is being redeveloped with a 3,620 square foot, two-
story, single-family dwelling. The proposed 390 square-foot, cove~ed lanai meets
all required setbacks and is not a part of this request. The applicants wish to install
a swimming pool that is elevated six feet above grade and 1 4, feet from the north
rear property line. On waterfront properties In the LMDR District. Code requires'
detached dwellings to be setback 25 feet from the rear property line unless
properties on each side have been developed with structures 20 feet from the rear
, property line. In that case, the setback may be 20 feet. This case is unusual.
While pools are considered accessory structures, normally requiring a 10-foot rear '
setback, this pool will be six feet above grade. According to Code, an, accessory
structure is separate from the principal structure. The lanai will connect the pool to
the dwelling.
~!J
, ,"
~, . r .
" ,
,.,
:...~ .. t
The applicants request to reduce the north rear setback from 25 feet to 14
, feet. The house's FFE (finished floor elevation) will be six feet above grade to meet
FEMA (Federal Emergency ,Management Act) requirements. The applicants want
the pool,at the same elevation as,the house and lanai. The lot does not have
, adequate room to absorb a six-foot grade differential between the house's FFE and
a pool built ai-grade. In ~ccordance with Code. the pool will be built outside the
required waterfront view'triangle. Code prohibits within the view triangle any plant
material or structure taller than 36 inches.
The house to the west has a 6-foot,FFE and is approximately 15 feet from
the north rear setback" The house to the east Is at-grade and approximately 25 feet
mcd0201
13
, 02/20/01
~
from the north rear setback. Both side property lines of the subject site feature 4-
foot hIgh hedges, which extends to the rear setback. Both adjacent properties have
several queen palms In their rear corners next to the subject site. Staff
recommends additional plant material be installed along the east and west property
lines to ,enhance screening.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on December 14,
2000. Staff recommends approval with one condition.
Mr. Parry said the applicant has modified the pool design since the last COB
m'eeting. He said the only change is the "notch-out" of the pool deck that would
provide a better view to the neighbor to the east of this property.
Roger Larsen, applicant~s representative, said the applicant has agreed to
remove a corner off the pool and remove trees so that the line of sight for the
neighbor to the east would not be affected.
"
, mcd0201
14
02/20/01
Nathan Hightower, representative for the neighbor to the west of this,
prop~rty, stated his opposition to this application. ,He said although the applicant
has taken measures to mitigate the line of sight issue, the setback from the rear
property line remains unacceptable to his client. He expressed concern regarding
the view from his client's property as well as the relocation of two large air
conditioning units adjacent to his client's property on the west. This construction
./00.......' would devalue his client's property. At the last COB meeting, his client requested
<,~) , the applicant move the pool to the west. His client also is concerned about the
height of the hedge between the two properties. In response to a question, Mr.
Hightower said he felt the changes indicated by the applicant would still block his
client's view.
Mr. Larsen said the home does not violate setback requirements. The
adjacent homeowner's home sits farther back on the lot. He said no line of sight
situation exists. H,e said if the applicant removed the pool from the site plan, it
would not improve the adjacent homeowner's existing line of sight. He said
although new platforms were built for them, the 2 air conditioning units have
always been in their present location on the east side of the house. He said the
applicant does not wish to move the pool further west because it would not be in
alignme~t with the house.
, Robert Osborne, Freestyle Pools, provided a diagram of the proposed pool
design. He said the pool cannot be shifted to the left unless the tree is removed.
The deck area is being reduced but does not affect the line of sight. The pool
. design incorporates a disappearing edge and the northern edge of the pool is 2 feet
lower than the main portion of the pool. The 2 wings on either end are 6 feet high.
d
..
In response to a question, ,Mr. Larsen said the neighbor on the west side of
this property has requested the pool not be moved in a westerly direction. Mr.
Hightower said that neighbor does not have a line of sight issue as does his client.
Ha said although the house that was constructed has already impeded the view of
,.;~.,~. .'.......:.... 11~';', \ ;1,. .' .~.: "~..:.' ,;.'., .,';."'. ,I.,. ':J.:" ...'.~......:. .,.,'..............,1.:.. .', ,~"'~' ,.', 'I~:.','.,."~; .~.~ ....: [:,4.~..: ....\:::;::...~'.I-!:.,'....
'~
the adjacent homeowner, the pool would violate the setback requirements and,
affect the line of sight even more. In response to a question, Assistant Planning
Director Cyndl Tarapanl said the most exterior structure is required to be 10 feet
from the seawall.
Member Gildersleeve moved to defer Item #B3 until after the next case is
heard, In an effort to permit the 2 parties to discuss the matter. The motion was
duly seconded and carrlod unanimously.
After discussion by the two parties, Mr. Larsen said they had reached an
agreement: 1) There will be no birdcage unless required by law; 2) the applicant
will move one of the air conditioning platforms as close to the street as is legal; 3)
the north end of the pool will be moved in a southerly direction by 2 feet, and
whatever else is in that sight line. Harry Cline, representative, said his client
residing directly to, the east; is agreeable to those changes.
. .,..,~>;)
, \.4:!~V
Member Gildersleeve moved for the COB to approve the flexible development
request to reduce required north rear setback from 26 feet to 14 feet as part of
Residential Infill Project at Island Estates of Clearwater Unit 6~A, Lot 14 with the
following conditions: 1) a 'buffer to be provided along east and west property lines,
which honor the required view triangles, and are capable of reaching and being
maintained at cia height of at least six~feet. 2) there will be no birdcage unless
, required by law; 31 the applicant will move one of the air conditioning platforms as
close to the street as is legal; and 4) the north end of the pool will be moved in a
southerly direction by 2 feet, and whatever else is in that sight line. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #84 - (Cont'd from 01/23/01) - 731 Bavwav Boulevard: E & A. Inc./Louis
Anastasopoulos - Owner/ Applicant. Request flexible development approval to
, ,permit a restaurant in the Tourist District, to reduce the front east setback from 10
feet to 1.6 feet along Clearwater Pass Avenue, and to reduce the required number ,
of parking spaces from 106 to 74, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project at Bayside Shores, Blk C, Lots 1 through 10. FL 00-11-49
Planner Mark Parry reviewed the request. The COB continued this
application on January 23, 2001 at the request of the applicant to further address
'access and ci~culation issues.
The 1.79 acre, roughly L-shaped site, on the southwest corner of Bayway
and Gulf boulevards fronts South Gulfview, Gulf, and Bayway boulevards and
Parkway Drive. A 'covered plaza, 22 feet wide at the north end and 39 feet wide at
the south end separate the site's two, one-story, mason.ry-block buildings: 1) east
building - 8,662 square-feet,and 2) west building - 8,184 square-feet. The buildings
, are 70 feet from the north, 50 feet from the south, 65 feet from the east, and 120
feet from the west property lines.
~,
The corner lot has 4 front setbacks: 1) north - Bayway Boulevard; 2) south -
South Gulfvlew Boulevard; 3) east - Gulf Boulevard; an,d 4) west - Parkway Drive.
mcd0201
15
02/20101
, ,
"'~11~" '
_ .. c' . :.t... ._ T. '. ~ ~. ". ~ .
, , '"\ ..~.
{. ,~.. '. ~.. .r\~": ."~4i,''''~''1''''.~ TH"..... r'T, e'l.
, : C r (' c . A. '. >.~, /
, . . ~ ' ,
. c'; ~'..
~
Two ,side setbacks form the intersection of the "L." 'One building is one foot from
the east side property line and two feet from the west side property line. The 87-
space parking lot is zero feet from the property line along Parkway Drive, two feet
from tho property line along Bayway Boulevard, three feet from the property line
along South Gulfview Boulevard, two feet from the south side property line, and
two feet from the property line along Gulf Boulevard.
The site, a shopping center within a desirable commercial area at the north
, end of the Sand Key Bridge on Clearwater Beach, has operated continuously since
its construction in the early 1970s. The site has undergone some deterioration and
appears dated. An addition and complete renovation of the fac;:ade is proposed.
Current uses include seven retail sales and service establishments, two restaurants
and one office. The British Pub restaurant offers limited outdoor dining. One tenant
sp'ace is vacant.'
. , '
, mcd0201
16
02/20/01
(~~
'7J~:(f
The applicant plans to, expand the shopping center by adding a one-story,
4,200 square foot restaurant. The total building area will increase from 16,736
s,quare feet to 20,936 square feet. The project also removes 17 parking spaces.
The addition will conform to front setback requirements. The project also will
, ',renovate the fac;:ade of the existing building with a "Bar Harbor" style. Extensive
landscaping will be installed along all street frontages and interior landscaping will
exceed the intent of the Code. Modifications needed to the landscape plan include
a tiered effect along Gulf, South Gulfview and Bayway boulevards, which will
provide a mix o~ foliage texture and color and reduce the use of sod.
"
All signage will meet Code. The applicant plans to modify signage for all ,
center tenants. Fencing and landscaping will enclose dumpsters and a clothing
d~op-off box will be removed. The proposal also removes the north access point
along Parkway Drive leaving two access points along Gulf Boulevard, an ingress-
only along Parkway Drive, and single access points on Bayway and South Gulfview
boulevards. Three ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant handicap
spaces will be provided. The new restaurant will primarily serve breakfast but also
will serve lunch and dinner.
. .' . .
The applicant requests to reduce the required east front setback along Gulf
Boulevard from 10 feet to 1.6 feet and reduce the number of required parking
spaces from 1 05,to 70 spaces. The parking requirement for the current shopping
center is 84 spaces. In isolation, the restaurant addition would require 29 additional
,spaces. Jonnatti Architecture, Inc. has submitted a parking analysis, which used a
, methodology agreed to by stDff and includes a parking accumulation study
performed three times per day between August 26 and September 1, 2000. The
parking analysis indicates that between 11 :00 a.m. and 1 ~OO p.m., a minimum of
68 parking spaces are available. At the proposed restaurant's expected peak
parking demand In the morning, parking lot demand is at its lowest, with 80 parking
spaces available.
.1"
,
"','
(; . '
" '
~
I,
The ORe reviewed the application and supporting materials on December 14,
2000. Staff recommends approval with two conditions.
. ~' .
<,
~
Mark Jonnatti, representative, stated he agreed with the staff report and
staff recommendations. In response to a question, he said he was unsure of the
number of seats the restaurant would include. He said the number of parking
spaces needed was determined by staff according to criteria regarding retail use in a
commercial tourist district.
,'.
','
Member Petersen moved for the COB to approve the flexible development
request to permit a restaurant in the Tourist District, to reduce the front east
setback from 10 feet to 1.6 feet along Clearwater Pass Avenue, and to reduce the
required number of parking spaces from 105 to 74, as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project at Bayside Shores, Blk C, Lots 1 through 10 with conditions:
1) a final landscape plan which exceeds Code requirements to be submitted to and
approved by staff prior to issuance of any permits and 2) all signage to be brought
into compliance with Code prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.' The
motion was duly seconded and carried ,unanimously.
~ ~ .
Item #B5 - CCont'd from 01/23/01) - Text Amendment: Citv of Clearwater -
Aoplicant. Request amendments to Community Development Code regarding ,
residential in11'II projects, parking standards for self, storage establishments, special
area plans governing development potential in Tourist District, docks, newsracks,
and an alternate member to the Community Development Board. TA 00-12-06
r~
1.:t't1
Senior Planner Gina Clayton presented the text amendments.
'mcd0201
17
02/20/01
After the passage of the expanded news rack requirements in Ordinan'ce No.
6526-00, representatives of the publishers requested relief for approximately 300
newsrack locations. Planning Department staff agreed to review the new
requirements and revise them if and where appropriate. Staff is reque~ting the
Board consider amending the newsrack provisions, as well as amendments
addressing residential infill projects, revising parking requirements for self storage
facilities, allowing approved special area plan provisions to supersede development
, potential enumerated for t~e Tourist District, revising and reorganizing docks
requirements, and adding an alternate board member to the Community
Development Board. All of these proposed amendments are considered to be
Important to operations and should not be delayed until the annual review of the
code.
Resldentiallnfill Project
,;.,~.l
' V
Staff is proposing amendments to the Low Density Re~ldential (LDR) Zoning
District that make residential infill projects for single family detached dwellings a
flexible' standard use. Staff is also proposing to make residential infill projects for all
permitted uses In the Low Medium Density Residential District (LMDR) a flexible
standard u'se Instead of a flexible development use. Since, the new Community
, Development Code went into effset in '1999, the Board has reviewed twenty.one '
residential Infill requests In the'LDR and LMDR Districts and approved all twenty-one
applications. Objection letters from neighboring property owners were received for
,~
"',L . l
~~,
~
~~.~ .
two of those cases and one letter of sLlpport was received for one other request.
Due to the fairly large, number of requests and the relatively minor nature of most
requests, staff is proposing this amendment. It should be noted that no changes
are proposed to the development standards and flexibility criteria that currently
apply to residential infill projects, except that in the LOR District, the only use
eligible for flexible standard application is single family dwellings.
Parking for SlJlf Storage Facilities
Staff is proposing to revise the parking requirements for self storage facilities.
Upon site plan review of a proposed self storage facility, staff found that existing
parking standards do not adequately reflect the parking demand generated by this
,use. The current requirements in the Commercial (Cl and Industrial, Research and,
Technology (IRT) Districts require parking to be based on land area. In actuality, ,
parking demand is based on the number of storage units located within a facility;
therefore~ staff is proposing parking requirements to be based on the number units,
ir)stead of the site area. In the C District staff is proposing to change the
requirement from one to ten spaces per 10.00. square feet of ' land area to one space
per twenty units plus two for the manager's office. In the IRT District, minimum
standard development provisions ~or self storage facilities require two spaces per
10.0.0. square feet of gross floorarea. Staff is proposing to change this to one
space per twenty units plus two for the manager's office. Existing parking
standards for flexible standard development self storage facilities in the IRT District
are the same as the requirements for minimum development. Staff is proposing to
, revise these requirements to one space per fifteen to twenty units plus two for the
manager's office. Staff is also proposing ths same standards for flexible
development self st~rage facilities in the IRT District.
Maximum Development Potential in the Tourist District
Staff is, proposing to add a provision to Code Section 2-80.1.1 that permits
development potential for land governed by an approved special area plan within the
Tourist (T) District to be governed by,such approved plan. The purpose of the
amendment is to permit the requirements of Beach by Design, if approved, to
'govern land use and development potential in the area of Clearwater Beach that is
zoned T and included in the Plan.
Docks
Staff is proposing to amend the dock regulations found in Code Section 3-
60.1. ' While several of the provisions are being revised; the amendments are
primarily organizational in nature. Staff is proposing to remove the Harbormaster
from the review process because Pinellas County Water and Navigation Control
Authority has final authority on navigational Issues. The review performed by the
Harbormaster is duplicative and can be modified or even denied by the Water and
Navigation Control Authority. Currently the dock regulations make no provisions for
commercial and multi-use docks. Staff is proposing to reorganize the existing
regulations into sections specifying requirements for docks serving single~family
mcd0.201
0.2/20.10.1
18
'"
dwellings and those requirements for commercial and multi-use docks. Staff is also
adding a mechanism for property owners to obtain deviations from requirements for
new docks by having a process whereby if neighbors agree to proposed deviations
. and the criteria is met, staff can approve the deviations. If neighbors cannot agree,
an application can be made to the Community Development Board for a Level Two
approval. Currently. the regulations only permit deviations for existing docks.
Additionally, staff is' proposing to eliminate the need for a Clearwater building permit
because the Building Department has never inspected dock construction. The
Pinellas Co'unty Water and Navigation Control Authority has this authority. Staff is
also proposing that docks only require approval from the Community Development
Coordinator, prior to the issuance of approval by the Pinellas County Water and
Navigation Control Authority.
:'
",
Newsracks
\~~)
Staff is proposing to amend to newsrack provisions in Code Section 3-909
by reorganizing the entire section into five subsections and revising some of the '
requirements. Staff is proposing to reduce the distance requirements between
modular newsracks from 300 feet to 100 feet. The proposed amendments would
permit two newsracks to locate side by side provided the racks are made of the
same material and they are the same color. More than two newsracks together will
require the use of a metal modular newsrack. Staff is also proposing to require all
newsracks in the Tourist and Downtown Districts to be metal and the same color.
Staff is proposing to amend Code Section 8-102 by including definitions of
newsracks and modular newsracks.
i'
I~.' ...
mcd020 1
19
02/20/01
':t.
Alternate Community Development Board Member
Staff is proposing amendments to Code Sections 5-202 and 6-203 that will
add one alternate member to the Community Development Board. This proposal
specifies that the alternate member is able to participate in meetings in order to
establish a quorum, participate in the absence of a regular member or during an
, agenda item when a regular member cannot vote due to a conflict of interest.
In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said the 100 foot distance separation
addresses the issue of proliferation of newsracks.' Mr. Stone said the 100 foot
separation was arrived by analyzing subdivision patterns. Staff is less concerned in
~he downtown and beach areas due to pedestrian activity. He said commercial
businesses want newspaper stands in front of their businesses, therefore increasing
, the separation between multiple newsracks would not be viable. He said multi-
publication racks can be found in approximately 20 - 26 locations throughout the
City. They are permitted to be 8 feet wide, 56 inches tall, and a depth of no more
than one rack with a maximum of 16 publications. '
'~J'
In response to a question, Mr. Stone said due to 'the size of the CDB and the
required quorum, staff felt the need for an alternate board member. Concern was
expressed that the alternate member would be expected to attend all meetings
:'.~ :.~';'!'.'.~',I'..:"::':;':~I'~.,':',~...:'..'~'~'I~"",.:~;.~.:..'~;::. .~,.,~'\..,,' ".' , '" ",:,.~,I:, ..I~',._'. ',.;'" .,''' '.:
~ ..' ;' '"
<'.'.:..
, ,
-,'
'~ .,'
1 . ~ r
.,
~ ,:; o'l
. "
',; ,
'. !.
I ~...:
o .~,
.,' '
, .,'
, "
, "
"
.t.'.
, I;,:"
c' ~';l\'
,-
',:'c'
. ':. ~
,
,"
'~. :'
. .,~' ,
. : .'.
.i.
','
.\\
~,
.~ ~
1'.':.',
~ 'I..'
{.r:
.d
"
.:.
~..:
. 'I
:H {
.. ,
. "t.
'.~. .
"
~ ~.
,1,
. q.
, L~.
" ,
.~ ::
,;
.....
I.',
, ,
",
"
.;-::
0;,.
,"
,~ft) ~
\":,.;."
. -..~
":..,,
,r:,~
, ~
... .'
. . '..
, " ',' I '. " .. " ,.<,' 4~ .' , " : " .;V; '\' " I,
I " , " , :. .. l. " " I
.,;..... " " .. '. " l " : " " : ..
although they may never serve on the board. Assistant City Attorney Leslie
Dougall-Sides said an alternate also could break tie votes.
Three persons spoke regarding the amendments.
In response to a concern, Mr. Stone said staff is confident these
amendments are enforceable. He said publishers have expressed their desire to
comply with the regulations and ar,e awaiting their approval.
, Member Petersen moved to recommend approval of the amendments to the
Community Development Code, Ordinance #6680-01, to the City Commission. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM C - lEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS'
Item #C1- 2408 Shellev Street: Wilfred & Muriel Pina - Owner/Applicant. Request
flexible development approval to reduce rear setback from 25 feet to zero feet as
part of Residentiallnfill Project at Gulf to Bay Acres 1 st Add, Blk E, Lot 13.
Fl 00-1 0-45 '
Planner Ryan Givens presented the proposal. The 0.21-acre site, in the Gulf
. '
to Bay Acres subdivision, is on the north side of Shelley Street, west of Kilmer
Avenue. The two retail stores and restaurant across Shelley Street are oriented
toward Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Most houses on the north side of the block back up
to a small pond, which serves the subdivision's drainage needs.
,
The site features a 1,600 square-foot, single-story house and mature tree
canopy. The rear of the property, which abuts the pond, has a six-foot tall wood
fence. The rear lawn slopes from the house towards the retaining wall to the north.
The City previously cited the property owners for constructing, without permits, a
six-foot high fence and large deck, which encroaches three feet into a five-foot
drainage easement along the west property line. The property owners have secured
permits for the fence. They have indicated that they will remove the decking which
encroaches on the west property line drainage easement, and hope to resolve the
deck violation via this Flexible Development request. The deck covers most of the
rear yard, wraps around an above-ground swimming pool, and extends to the
retaining wall, resulting in a zero rear setback. The applicants have expressed
safety concerns that honoring required setbacks would result in a steep drop-off at
the deck's edge.
To preserve water views, staff recommends prohibiting structures which
exc,eed 36 inches on the subject property, including decking and fencing, within 10
,'feet of the retaining wall or within the waterfront sight triangle. Due to the six-foot
fence that extends along most of the site's side property lines, the deck is not
readily seen f.rom adjacent properties. The deck, constructed at varying elevations,
, almost 'covers the rear lawn. The portion of deck, adjacent to the house, is more
than four feet above grade while the portion. adjacent to the retaining wall, is
approximately one foot above grade. The deck, constructed over soil, allows
mcd0201
20
02/20101 '
.,'.' ..,.... "..: i.fj1'. .l~ ".\. ~.' ..<.;~~' '" ~ I"~'(~"'>~"";~:":""':".""'f''';''';' 'r:'.' ,/,,.::-\'".'.'.,,:,,>.: .'~." ..",'\' "1'\"-" I,....f~ .~::....,,:\
"
~
rairiwater to percolate into the ground. The deck will comply with Code, except for
the request for a reduced rear setback. To meet all Code requirements, the
applicants will replace the portion of fence that encroaches on the waterfront sight
visibility triangle with a non-opaque fence, no more than 36-inches high.
On December 14, 2000, the ORe reviewed the application and supporting
materials: Staff recommends approval with six conditions.
'"
In response to a question, Wilfred Pina, applicant, said he did not realize he
was in violation of Code and has taken steps to resolve the violation. He said
staff's recommended conditions are acceptable.
, . ~ . .
Member Petersen moved for ,the COB to approve the flexible development
request to reduce the rear setback from' 25 feet to zero feet as part of Residential
Infill Project at Gulf to Bay Acres 1 st Add, Blk E, Lot 13; The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
','
Item #C2 - 333 South Gulfvtew Boulevard: David R. Little (Barrv Barrinaer. d.b.a.
Kev Laroo Bar & Grill) - Owner/Aoplicant. Request flexible development approval to
reduce east rear setback frOm 10 feet to zero feet and the north side setback from
10 feet to' zero feet as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at
lloyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lot 67. FL 00-12-62,
, ,
.d;;~
I .
"'~:F-""'....
..',~r
Planner Ryan Givens reviewed the request. The 0.16-acre site, on the east
side of South Gulfview Boulevard, north of Fifth Street, features a Caribbean-style,
two-story, 4,566 square foot mixed-use building. An ,ice cream parlor and retail
'shop occupy the ground floor, with a restaurant and apartment unit on the second
story. The building's front porch and upper balcoiw overlook the Gulf of Mexico. A
brick patio along South Gulfview Boulevard has outside tables and benches. The
structure has had many additions and, along with asphalt, almost covers the entire
site.
" '
'.
~ 1, ~
('"
, '
To the rear, a smaller building with an office and apartment was built
approximately 'two feet from the rear property line and is legally nonconforming. A
six-foot, wood fence, which extends along the rear property line, is in poor
condition and requires panel replacement. Trash and debris along the east property
,line are between the building and a short retaining wall. To the center of the
property, immediately under the primary building, several items, stored outside, are
partially visible from adjacent properties.
The area features a variety of land uses associated with the tourist.oriented
district. The parking lot, of the six-story Americana Hotel to the north, wraps the
site to the east. A McDonald's restaurant is to the south and public parking and the
beach are west, acro'ss South Gulfview Boulevard. The Americana Hotel, a
relatively modern structure, has f,ew architectural details and windows on the
elevation abutting the subject site. The hotel's south property line is not
landscaped. A trash enclosure is approximately five feet from the subject property
line. J'he parking lot has minimal landscaping.
mcd0201
21
02/20101
\f,( I,~..;".,._~..I',.."~~...-. . ',.' I ""~." ::.'; ..... ~ ~ ......:."..'....,.. . "...".~~..~..,~',~.'.',.:.... }~:1"...::':' ...~Ir..,. ; :,.,:.. ......, ',i.I'.:~~-" ..,~.,....;..,,'3:..LI:.:.1
. ..' ',,' ,.'. ,.':......'.>..r~. :~...,... ':,:-,,"..\.,,1 1,I'r.....,~..... ;i,. '. " .~:~.".. '.: ,.', ...;.... .:'...,'........:.. ........ ;"..-:,....~, .,~ '~':"'.
'~
The applicant requests ,to reduce the east rear setback from 10 feet to zero
to accommodate a 96 square-foot walk-in refrigeration unit to store beverages for,
the restaurant and bar on the main building's second floor. Underground pipes
provide direct access from the refrigeration unit to the restaurant. The current unit
was installed without a required building permit. The applicant wishes to resolve
existing violations via this Flexible Development re'quest. The site limits options for
. plac'ement of the refrigeration unit. Areas under the primary building' need to remain
open for pedestrian access, trash collection, and parking for the second-story
apartment.
"
, ..
The applicant also seeks to reduce the north side setback from 10 feet to
zero feet for the deck, which abuts the north property line, to Improve ,pedestrian
access to storage rooms and the property's rear. The deck was constructed
without site plan approval or a building permit. Although this request could be
review'ed as a Flexible Standard development, it has been included in this
application.
. '
,t, , .
I".
"
'1."'
" ,
I '\;f '.'
,..':. .
p.;. I T
i '
t., I
The applicant intends to replace the wood fence along the rear property line,
which will improve the site's appearance from the Americana Hotel parking lot and
partiC!lIy screen the 8-foot high refrigeration unit. Staff recommends buffering the
unit with an enclosure that resembles the site' s architectural style and color.
\~.: '
, "
'!;l',
';It\~
('1.~1
...~
The ORC reviewed the application and supporting materials on January 18,
,2001.' Staff recommends approval with five conditions.
\
Harry Cline, representative, said the applicant has no objection to the staff
report except to the extent that the decking extends across the property line. He
said the applicant has ordered a new survey and if the results reveal an
encroachment, the decking would be removed within 7~ days.
( ',j
~
Member Pliska moved for the CDS to approve the Flexible Development
application to reduce the east rear setback from 10 feet to zero feet and reduce the
north side setback from 10 feet to zero feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project at L1oyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lot 67 with conditions: 1) The
refrigeration unit is to be screened with an enclosure that is architecturally-
integrated with the style of the existing building, with final materials and design to
be approved by the planning department; 2) the existing f~nce along the east (rear)
property line be replaced with a new, six-foot wood fence prior to issuance of a
building permit (other than a fence permit); 3) all proper permits and inspections for
the'refrigeration unit and the deck be secured within one month of the community
development board approval of this application; 4) all outdoor storage be
discontinued and removed prior to the issuance of any building, permits or within
one month of the community development board approval of this application,
whichever is less; 6) all trash/debris be removed along the east property line prior to
the issuance of any building permits or within one month of, Community
Development Board approval of this application, whichever occurs first; and 6) the
property be resurveyed and if it is determined that' the existing deck encroaches the
mcd0201
22
02/20/01
......1::..
:..~ ~ ~.l:;~~~";' (:. >
,. <.'
.\ ','
",., ,I c " .:,..\"" .
,,/,,' I ~'.'. ~. .,....J ',,' :.,'..,' ;.....~ ">.~" t",. ',1.,:'.,.:, ,Iof,;,'" ,....,'- "":"','~\ ',' ,,;\ . '.:.:,..,' ,~~..' .J. I >.:. ". ", ":' ,I. ~''''j . +,:::',\':'\ .
'~
Boldog property to the north, the encroachment must be removed within 75 days of
the Community Development Board approval.
The motton was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #C3 - 623 Drew Street: Robert Schoeller - Owner/Applicant. Request flexible
development approval to Increase the height of a tower from 50 to 66 feet and to
reduce the number of required parking spaces from 91 to 21 as part of a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at Jane's Sub of Nicholson's Addition
~o Clearwater Harbor, Blk7, Lots 1,-3. FL 00-11-57
,,'
Planner Ryan Givens reviewed this request. The 1. 51-acre site, on Drew
Street's nor:th side, is between the Pinellas Trail CSX Railroad tracks near the
Downtown District's northern boundary and the Periphery Plan's Northwest
Expansion Area. The area has a mix of land uses, including office, the City's' gas
company, war~house, retail, and vacant land. Nearby Drew Street properties are
not well integrated and feature varying levels of maintenance and redevelopment.
The area's land use pattern is shnilar to suburban industrial rather than a central
,business district. While the future land use map designates the site as CBD, Central
Business District, the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan designates the
property as Heavy Commercial where encouraged uses include light assembly,
office/warehousing and distribution. Generally, less intensive uses are permitted.
1'fiPt.
"~i!il
The site, which needs repairs, previously was used for ice storage. Its
industrial character includes a loading dock on Drew Street, large blank masonry,
, walls, and an interior parking lot full of debris. The site features two 24-foot tall
buildings: 1) west building - brick faf;ade has new decorative window frames and 2)
east building - faf;ade on Drew Street resembles an office with blank masonry walls
on other elevations., The site is almost covered with asphalt and has almost no
landscaping. It has been the focus of significant discussion due to,its neglect and
resulting blight on'the area.
'.,1
,!,
The owner uses the site for his artist' s studio and intends to redevelop it as
his personal residence, a home for his son, and an art studio with a gallery and
office. The project would transform the warehouse buildings into a Renaissance-
type villa"which the applicant compares to the Ringling Museum in Sarasota. The
design will incorporate the buildings into a mixed-use development. Exterior walls
will remain masonry. Much of the brickwork will be preserved and incorporated into
the desig'n. All structures will have flat roofs with etchings atop. The two buildings
will be joined, by a two-story addition: 1) enclosed upper floor - part of studio and 2)
: lower floor - breezeway & covered parking.
"
, '
"
~
,
The Drew Street elevations will include a large arched window, a gated entry
to the parking lot, and a medallion. Statues will top columns along the gated
entry's drive. The north Jones Street elevation will be the most ornate, with .
windows, moldings, arches, and brickwork. On the north property line, the project
will construct a 2, 1 20 square-foot, 45.foot tall tower resembling a gatehouse as a
home for the applicant's son. A six.foot metal grill fence will enclose an Interior
mcd020 1
23
02/20/01
~
courtyard, which will features gardens, statues, a pond, and reflecting pool. East
and west elevations will remain relatively bare, except for moldings. Adding
, windows overlooking the, railroad tracks or Pinel/as Trail is impractical due to
security and, noise concerns. A 66.foot tower in the center of the site will balance
the development's design and reinforce the Renaissance style theme. Code permits
a maximum height of 10.0 feet as part of a Flexible Development application.
Landscaping, appropriate for a downtown area, will accent the building's exterior.
The interior courtyard will be heavily landscaped.
The applicant's residence will be 15,330 square-feet. Space for the studio,
photography, frame making, paint mixing, painting, and storage will take up 22,
033 square-feet. In the future, the applicant plans to convert approximately 2,500
square feet of his personal residence as flex space to expand his gallery for private
showings.
mcd0201
24
02/20/01
A maximum of 6,people will operate the studio and gallery on any day.
Workers will inclUde the artist applicant, his son, 2 office staff, a part-time frame
maker, and 1 ,possible future staff member. Generally, 1 or 2 customers at a time
visit the site by invitation for specific events or appointments. Few people walk-in,
due to the nature of the business. The artist intends to operate the studio from 9
a.m. to 6 p,.m. and may open for weekends.
......It\
''o.~{~
The applicant requests reducing the required number of parking spaces from
91 spaces to 21. The applicant contends that 21 spaces will meet all site-parking,
needs. Routinely, staff attempts to limit on-site surface parking in the Downtown
District. A large parking lot would degrade the project's architectural style. The use
,will not generate the same parking need as traditional retail sales. By applying a
parking 'standard based on need, rather than size, the site should need only eight
spaces. Parking spaces may be leased from adjacent properties when the artist
hosts a gallery, show, which normally is held at night when most nearby parking lots
are 'vacant.
'With its unique design and its potential to influence similar redevelopment,
the proposal meets the intent of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the
,Downtown Design Guidelines, the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, and basic planning principles for a central business district.
, While this ambitious proposal would impact positively on downtown, staff is
concerned the project be completed in a timely manner. Several vertical pieces of
metal rebarr have been installed on the western building's roof to support
decorative roof elements included in the redevelopment proposal. A large concrete
block pond has been constructed without a building permit. ,The loading dock on
Drew Street is a safety concern due to its lack of a barrier or railing. Building ,
Inspectors have not cited the property owner for these violations as redevelopment
efforts are planned to commence immediately. Staff recommends attaching a time
,sensitive condition to the approval.
~
The ORC reviewed the application and supporting materials on January 18,
2001. Staff recommends approval with seven conditions.
,. ,',
"
,~
::;
'(:a
~
I:
'\
In, response to a question, Planner Ryan Givens said the applicant must build
the sidewalk. Ms. Tarapanl said staff's condition is clear regarding Code regulations
and enforcement. Staff will continue to work with the applicant to ensure all issues
are resolved within the specified deadlines. It, was felt that the rebarr should be
covered and that any construction that already has begun should be completed.
Ms. Tarapani said staff has been working with the applicant since last fall in an
effort to encourage him to move forward with compliance.
Thomas Coats, representative, said the applicant intends to first address the
Drew Street fayade. Mr. ~choeller agreed to complete it within a year.
Mr. Glve,ns said after consulting with his attorney, the applicant has
requested that staff condition #4 be amended and staff agreed to amend that
condition as follows: an' application for a building permit be submitted for the drew
,street facade and that all outstanding code violations be resolved within .four
months of the Community Development Board decision.
Member Pliska moved for the COB to approve the Flexible Development
application to increase the height of a tower as part of a mixed~use development
from 50 to 66 feet and to reduce the number of required parking from 91 spaces to
21 spaces, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project at Jones Sub of
Nicholson's Addition to Clearwater Harbor, Blk?, Lots 1-3, with conditions:' Trash
collection facilities are provided to the satisfaction of Solid Waste department and
the design is coo'rdinated with the Planning Department; 2) in the ,event square
footage that is allocated for residential uses are converted into nowesidential uses
the Planning Department shall recalculated the parking requirement for the
cO/'UU;lrted square footage (the approximately 2,500 square feet of flex space to a
gallery exempt) and Code, requirements must be met; 3) in the event the artist
studio portion of the building is converted into any other use (inclllding other types
of retail) the Planning Department shall recalculate the parking requirement for the
, converted square footage and the ,code requirements must be met; 4) an application
,for a building permit be submitted for the drew street facade and that all
outstanding code violations be resolved within four months of the Community
Development Board decision; 5) all outdoor storage and debris be removed prior to
the issuance of any building permits or within two months, whichever is less; 6)
outdoor storage of materials be prohibited; 7) all signage meet code and be
, architecturally integrated into the design of the building; and 8) a minimum of a five-
foot sidewalk be provided on Jones street.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #C4 3070 Gulf-to-Bav Boulevard: RB-3 Associates, Randall Sanderson 1993-
1 Trust, and WR-1 Associates - Ownerl ADoHcant. Request flexible development
approval to provide direct access to a major arterial street for a proposed overnight
accommodation establishment, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project Sec. 16-29-16, M&B 23.02. FL 00-12-64
mcd0201
02/20101
25
,:,),.<.,.,,: .....,~.::~~ .'.~"\'p.\".. ..;, : ',"J \ "", . '.,' ,1:',1,..:. ,,~',"..~ '~'J ,."" ,"/.~.,'" ,.i";l'" ~,:':',;, I'.," ,'ll,'!'_~' :"~" ",:'4', ~', ,i' I',.;'~,)I ':-:' :'"
, .
~
Planner Mark Parry reviewed this request. A 69,625 square*foot, 127-room
Fairfield Inn hotel is unde~ construction on the 4.3-acre site, on the northwest
corner of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and McMullen-Booth Road, east of Bay Street. The
fifty-foot high building will have five storfes and feature a shingle roof, stucco '
exterior, latticework, cornice lines, and detailed window treatments. The site has
one 64~square foot, 20-foot high freestanding sign, 10 feet from the front south
property line. The sign, which identifies a previous business, will be removed.
" ,
On October 9, 2000, staff approved the project's Flexible Standard
Development application FLS 00-07-46, which included a request to increase the
building's height from 25 feet to 50 feet. The site also will be developed with two
commercial outparcel uses. As a condition of approval, all site development will
, share access.
:, ".
A condition for approval of the height increase, prohibits the project from
direct access to a major arterial street. The approved site plan indicates access to
the site will be from Bay Street, a secondary street, and from the McMullen*Booth
, Road service road. The applicant seeks to amend the site plan to allow right*
in/right-out access on Gulf-to*Bay Boulevard, a major arterial street. This change
requires the applicant to request a Comprehensive In fill Redevelopment Project use.
"
'1'
4; .
",
Otherwise, the proposal remains the same as previously approved. The
applicant proposes to remove the entrance on Gulf*to-Bay Boulevard, west of the
.McMullen Booth Road service road. The project includes extensive landscaping on
the site's interior and installation of landscaping along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard,
McMullen-Booth Road, and Bay Street, prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the hotel. The City's Traffic Operations Engineer's analysis indicates
the proposed access along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard may help prevent congestion on
Bay Street and may encourage departing guests, headed 'east on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard, to turn west and use the U-turn west of Bay Street. Staff was
concerned accidents could result from the project's use of the Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard acceleration lane for McMullen Booth Road traffic as a deceleration lane
for motorists entering the site. Field observations, however, indicate that motorists
merge with Gutf-to-Bay Boulevard traffic prior to a point, 40 feet east of the
proposed rlght-in/right-out access point.
~-., \' ,
': " , ...!'$,t
, ("1
'", .
Staff and visitors from the office building across Bay Street from the hotel
are the primary users of Bay Street. Observations indicate that southbound Bay
Street traffic turns left onto Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. During heavy, eastbound
traffic, this movement includes temporary stops in the medium's striped safety
island. However, as a condition for receiving a driveway permit, FOOT (Florida
Department of Transportation) will replace the striped area with a raised Island.
Staff recommends a certificate of occupancy not be issued prior to FDOT's
inspection and approval of the raised safety island and related traffic "uprIghts." ,
\:4
The safest method of heading eastbound on Gulf-to*Bay Boulevard from the
site will be to travel approximately 300 feet west and make a U-turn from the two-
way, left turn lane. By providing a right~in/right-out access point along G~lf to Bay
mcd0201
26
02/20/01
'"j l I
.', '. .,'."..'" .'...;......".., :.. '. ,,',..,.... '" :.......~. \:I.,"j....~ ..."~l..":...,'." .,:.,:.::.'.I........,..'...~. ..:....':. ..:.,~:' .~, :',,~ :...,i,.,,,,,..,,.:.l,';., I.\.I.:,~:,
~
Boulevard, hotel guest~ can exit onto Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and a'void potential
problems on Bay Street. A right-out only exit onto Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard also may
encourage departing guests to use the safer method to travel east on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard. The proposed access also may help prevent congestion on Bay Street.
The ORC reviewed the application and supporting materials on January 18,
2001. Staff recommends approval with four conditions.
" ,
Member Johnson moved for the COB to approve the Flexible Development
application to permit direct access to a Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, a major arterial
street, for an overnight accommodation establishment as part of a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project ,at Sec. 16-29-16, M&B 23.02 with conditions: 1)
access to be limited to right-in/right-out on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard with a raised
island, per FOOT requirements; 2) FOOT's inspection and approval of raised safety
island and traffic, "uprights" required prior to issuance of hotel's Certificate of
Occupancy; 3) any freestanding sign to be ,limited to six feet in height above
, finished grade of parcel's front line unless part of a Comprehensive Sign Program,
as required by Code; and 4) all future access to outparcels to be restricted to this
single driveway. Requests for an additional driveway for one or both outparcels to
require further review by the City and Community Development Board. The motion
was duly secon~ed and carried unanimously.
\ '
.. ,
ITEM' 0 - lEVEL THREE APPLICATIONS
""'Il~'
f ..(. ';
t:.:... Item #D1 - 160 North Belcher Road: H.G. Anderson/Citv of Clel'lrwater -
Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of 0.72 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to CG, Commercial General Classification and rezoning to C,
Commercial District at a portion of Section 13, Township 29 South, Range 15 East,
M & B 11.03. ANX 01M12w01
Professional Planner Brad Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.72
acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to CG, Commercial
General ClassificGtion and rezoning to C, Commercial District at a portion of Section
13, Township 29 South, Range 15 East, M & B 11.03. The motion was duly
seconded and carrlod unanimously.
Item #02 1306 Woodbine Street: Rosemarv Baker/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/Aoolicant: Request annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with a land Use
, Plan Amendment to Residential low and rezoning to low Medium Density
Residential (lMDR) district at Lot 8, Block C, Pine Ridge Subdivision.
ANX 01-12w02
The applicant has withdrawn this request.
, '
, ',\;J
Item #03 - 1734 Cardinal Drive: Phvliss Daliendo/Cltv oJ Clearwater -
Owner/Aoollcant. Request annexation of 0.19 acre to the City ~ith a land Use
mcd0201
27
02/20/01
~<'J;~~k:~". ; <'~ ;:V.: 'l .:.~.~~"i'~.',.J,: .:,,~
t.'j' ". " .
,
. < >'i '. a. ~~
'~
Plan Amendment to Residential Lciw and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential '(lMDR) district at Lot 6, Pinellas Terrace First Addition. ANX 01-12-03
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
,\ "
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.19
acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential low
and rezoning to low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district at lot 6, Pinellas
Terrace First Addition. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #D4 -1492 Carolvn Lane: Cleareather Gross/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/Aoolicant. R'equest annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 16, Terra-Alto Estates. ANX 01-12-04
Mr. Cornellus presented the annexation request.
mcd0201
,28
02/20101
::., , ~
~ '
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.18
acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low
and rezoning to low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district at Lot' 16, Terra- '
'Alto Estates. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.:
t...n~\
,..."(':-)1
Item #05 - 2827 St. John Drive: Jeffrey Drury/City of Clearwater -
Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of,0.15 acre to the City with a land U,se
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 6, Block 0, Virginia Groves Terrace, Fifth
Addition. ANX 01-12-05
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
"
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.15
acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low,
and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (lMDR) district at lot 6, Block 0,
Virginia Groves Terrace, Fifth Addition. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
I "
,
, '
~'
. '
~'.. .
:t'
/." .
Item #06 - 1754 West Manor Avenue: Timothv Heusinqer/Citv of Clearwater -
OwnerlAoplicant. Request annexation of 0.19 acre to the City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to low Medium D'ensity
Residential (LMDR) district at lot 21, Clearwater Manor. ANX 01-12-06
!.'"
L
I.
The applicant has withdrawn'this request.
L~A
.
Item #07 - 1941 West Skvllne Drive: Gail LeBlanc/Citv of Clearwater -
'Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of 0.17 acre to the City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to low Medium Density
Residential (lMDR) district at Lot 106, Skyline Groves. ANX 01-12-08
~, . I
~ f '
~
, "
"'>')'
"
, <...~~~
L::.Ii
.
~I.
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
, Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.17
acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low
and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 106, Skyline
Groves. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #D8 - 1309 Woodbine Street: James Morrow/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/ADDUcant. Request annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density,
Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 7, block C, Pine Ridge. ANX 01-12-09
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.18
acre to the City Commission with a' Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low
and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential ILMDR) district at Lot 7, block C,
Pine Ridge. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #D9 - 108 K Street: Michael Stifel/Citv of Clearwater - Owner/ADolicant.
Request annexation of 0.4 acre to the City with a Land Use Plan Amendment to '
Residential Urban and rezoning to Low Medium Density AesidentiaJ (LMDR) district
for lots 23 & 24, Crystal Heights Unit 1, including abutting K Street right-of-way.
ANX 01-12-12
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.4
, acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban
and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for Lots 23 & 24,
Crystal Heights Unit 1, including abutting K Street rightpof-way. The motion was
duly soconded and carried unanimously.
Item #D 10 - 1513 Owen Drlvo: Jason Thacker/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/ADDlicant. Request annexation of 0.24 acre to the City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district for a portion of Section 8, Township 29, South Range
16 East, M&B 22.06. ANX 01-12-13
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.24
acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low
and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for a portion of
Section 8, Township 29, South Range 16 East, M&B 22.06. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
mcd020 1
29
02/20/01
~
Item #011 - 2839 St. John Drive: Whetsel Williamson/Citv of Clearwater -
Owner/ADPlicant. Rcquest annexation of O. '8 acre to the City with a Land Use
Plan Amendment to Residential low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district for Lot 12, Block D, Virginia Grovos' Terrace Fifth
Addition. ANX 01-' 2-14
; .~' .
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
, ,', .
, Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.18
acre to the City Commission with a Land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Low
and rezoning to Low Medium' Density Residential (LMDR) district for Lot 12, Block
D, Virginia Groves Terrace Fifth Addition. The motion was duly seconded and
,carried unanimously.
~.' . 'I
"
,.
~, : .
mcd0201
30
02/20/01
.." I .
l' ,..
~ '. c '
"f. .
c,;,'
Item '#012- 1234 Bell Drive: Yvettes Lakis/Citvof Clearwater - Owner/Applicant.
Request annexation of 0.34 acre to the City with a Land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential Urban and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district
at ~{Jt 13/ Canterbury Heights. ANX 01-12-15
, ..
I,', .
, "
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
,'I",;,'',}~
' ,
.;.W~ .
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.34
acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban
,and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district at Lot 13/
Canterbury Heights. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
"
Item #D 13 - 2176 NE Coachman Road: Suncoast Christian School/Citv of
Clearwater - Owner/ADDlicant. Request annexation of 0.39 acre to the City with a
Land Use Plan 'Amendment to Residential Urban and rezoning to Low Medium
Density Residential (LMDR) district at a portion of Lot 8 of Mosel! Acres
Subdivision. ANX 01-12~16
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
,I
, ,
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.39
acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban
, and rezoning to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district at a portion of Lot . ,
8 of Mosel! Acres Subdivision. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
"
''"
'tern #014 - 1919 Old Coachman Road: Rooer Soencer/Citv of Clearwater-
Owner/ADoUcant. Request annexation of 0.21 acre to the City with a land Use'
Plan' Amendment to Residential Low and rezoning to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) district for Lot 14 and the north'one-half of Lot 15, Block A,
Sunset Point Estates. ANX 01-12-17
.
, Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
:\'c. c "
'~
"
,;.
,",.
" ,
"., .
\'
..
; ,'I
"'~
<.
~ .,..';....
"I~
..;~: 'r'
"I' .",
Member Johnson' moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.21
acre to the City Commission' with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential low
and rezoning to low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for lot 14 and the
north one-half of lot 15, Block A, Sunset Point Estates. The motion was duly
, seconded a:nd carried unanimously ~
Item #015 - 22995 US 19N: SidQey Savelle/Citv of Clearwater - Owner/Aoolicant.
'Request annexation of 0.61 acre to the City with a land Use Plan Amendment to
CG, Commercial General Classification and rezoning to' C, Commercial District at a
portion of Section 8, Township 29 South, Range 16 East, M&B 22.05.
ANX 01-12-18
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the a~nexation of 0.61
,acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to CG, Commercial
General Classification and rezoning to C, Commercial District at a portion of Section '
8, Township 29 South, Range 16 East, M&B 22.05. The motion was duly
, seconded and carried unanimously.
item #0 1 6 - 693 South Belcher Road: Sei Funeral Service Florida/City of
Clearwater - Owner/Aoolicant. Request annexation of 0.37 acre to the City with a
land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Medium and rezoning to Medium Density
Residential (MDR) district for a portion of Section 18, Township 29 South, Range
16 East.' ANX 01~12-19
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.37,
acre to the City Commission with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential
,Medium and rezoning to Medium Density Residential (MDR) district for a portion of
Section 18, Township 29 South, Range 16 East. The motion was duly seconded
and carrlod unanimously. '
, '
Item' #D 1 7 - 2824 St.' John Drive: Mariam Johnson/City of Clearwater -
Owner/Aoplicant. Request annexation of 0.16 acre to the City with a land Use
Plan Amendment to Reside~tial Urban and rezoning to low Medium Density
Residential (lMDR) district for lot 2, Block B, Virginia Groves Terrace Fifth
Addition. ANX 01-12~20
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.16
acre to the City with a land Use Plan Amendment to Residential Urban and rezoning
'. to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district for Lot 2, Block B, Virginia
Groves Terrace Fifth Addition. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
mcd0201
31
02/20/01
',:,~
,
.'
, '.
, ,
'",
';."> -
;. ~ . .
~L>
"
,
j~.<' ", ~ >
, '
\ '
,d
. .,
, "
o
\; .f
;". .
. "" .
I'
'.i.
~
"
,
~.' ~'. ,
Jtem #018 - 2841 SR 590: Helen Elllot/Cltv of Clearwater'- Owner/Aoollcant.
Request annexation of 0.28 acre to the City with a land Use Plan Amendment to
Residential Urban and rezoning to low Medium Density ResldentlallLMDR) district
1?r lots 3 and 3A, Spring lake Estates. ANX 01-12-21 '
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.28
acre to the City with'a Land Use Plan Amendment t~ ~esidential Urban and rezoning
to Low Medium Density ResidentialllMDR) district for Lots 3 and 3A, Spring Lake
Estates", The motIon was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Item #019 - 2060 Calumet Street: Florida Graohics Suoolv & James Revnolds/Citv
9f Clearwater - 'Owner/AooUcant. Request annexation of 0.18 acre to the City with
, a Land Use Plan Amendment to IL, Industrial Limited Classification and rez,oning to
IRT, Industrial, Research & Technology District for the South 235 feet of the East
'152 feet of the West 465.88 feet of Lot 9, Clearwater Industrial Park.
ANX 01-12-22
Mr. Cornelius presented the annexation request.
Member Johnson' moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 0.18 '
acre to the City with a Land Use Plan Amendment to IL, Industri.al Limited
,Classification and rezoning to IRT, Industrial, Research & Technology District for the
, South 235 feet of the East 152 feet of tho West 465.88 feet of Lot 9,' Clearwater
Industrial Park. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM E - APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Member Petersen moved ,to approve the minutes of the January 23, 2001,
as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member. The
motionwas duly seconded and carrlod unanimously.
ITEM F - DfRECTORS ITEMS - None.
Member Johnson said it was a pleasure working with everyone.
, ITEM G - ADJOURNMENT '
The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
, I
- !
'......
Ch ir
Community Developm
mcd0201
,32
02/20/01