10/21/2008
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
October 21, 2008
Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair
Thomas Coates Vice-Chair
Dana K. Tallman Board Member
Jordan Behar Board Member
Frank L. Dame Board Member
Doreen DiPolito Board Member
Richard Adelson Board Member
Norma R. Carlough Alternate/Acting Board Member
Also Present: Gina Grimes Attorney for the Board
Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Gina Clayton Assistant Planning Director
Brenda Moses Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING:
September 16, 2008
Member Dame requested that regarding the minutes of the regular Community
Development Board meeting of September 16, 2008, that sentence 4 of paragraph 7 on page 4
read “…Joe Vatalero.”; and that sentence 5 of paragraph 7 on page 4 read “…Mr. Vatalero’s…”
Member Behar moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development
Board meeting of September 16, 2008, as corrected. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
D. CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1 – 2):
1. Case:
REZ2008-07007 – 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Three Application
Continued from the meeting of September 16, 2008
Owner/Applicant:
BVG Acquisition, Inc.
Representative:
Katherine E. Cole, Esq.; Johnson Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
(911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; telephone: 727-461-1818).
Location:
28.32 total acres located generally at 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (south side
of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard between Cross Boulevard [east] and Sky Harbor Drive
Atlas Page:
[west]).300A. and 300B.
Request:
Application for Zoning Atlas amendment approval from the Medium Density
Residential (MDR) District to the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District
under the provisions of Section 4-602 of the Community Development Code.
Existing Uses:
An assisted living facility providing independent living and congregate
care
Proposed Uses:
A life care center providing assisted independent living and congregate
care and skilled nursing.
Community Development 2008-10-21 1
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Gina Clayton, Assistant Planning Director.
Member Dame moved to accept Gina Clayton as an expert witness in the fields of
zoning, annexations, land use/rezoning applications and demographics, land development code
and land development code amendments, and general planning. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Assistant Planning Director Gina Clayton presented the request.
See Staff Report: Exhibit REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
Ed Armstrong, representative, stated this rezoning request is related to the next case.
He said the applicant has had conversations with his neighbors, and expected more questions
regarding the site plan than the rezoning application.
Member Dame moved to recommend approval of Case REZ2008-07007 based on the
evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing,
and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
2. Case:
FLD2008-05012 – 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
BVG Acquisition Inc.
Representatives:
Marc Mariano and Bryan Zarlenga, Tampa Bay Engineering Group Inc.
(380 Park Place Blvd, Suite 300, Clearwater, FL 33759; phone: 727-531-3505; fax: 727-
531-1294; e-mail: mmariano@tbegroup.com).
Location:
31.12 total acres located generally at 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (south side of
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard between Cross Boulevard [east] and Sky Harbor Drive [west]).
Atlas Page:
300 A and300B.
Zoning:
Commercial (C), Office (O) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) Districts (see
companion Case REZ2008-07007 on this agenda to rezone that portion zoned MDR to
Medium High Density Residential [MHDR] District).
Request:
Flexible Development approval for the redevelopment of the overall 31.12-acre
property zoned Commercial (C) District, Office (O) District and proposed Medium High
Density Residential (MHDR) District (companion rezoning Case REZ2008-07007) to
permit a total of 229 attached dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73 units existing to
remain; 156 units proposed), a total of 40 nursing home beds (proposed) and a total of
170 beds of assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain; 76 beds proposed); (A) In
the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 2.45 acres, a lot width of 200 feet along Gulf-
to-Bay Boulevard (north) and a total of 210 feet along Cross Blvd, a front (north) setback
along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard of four feet (to existing sign) and 28 feet (to existing
pavement), a front (east) setback along Cross Blvd of one-foot (to existing pavement), a
front (north) setback along Cross Boulevard of 25 feet (to proposed guardhouse), a side
(east) setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a side (west) setback of two feet (to
existing pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and a
building height of 81 feet (to roof deck of existing assisted living facility building), as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the Commercial (C) District, under the
provisions of Section 2-704.C; (B) in the proposed Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District with a lot area of 28.33 acres, a lot width along Sky Harbor Drive of 282
feet, a reduction to the front (west) setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to 21 feet (to
existing building), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to five feet (to existing
Community Development 2008-10-21 2
pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback at the southeast corner of the adjacent
nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet (to proposed pavement), an increase to building
height from 30 to 82 feet (to top of roof of proposed building) and a reduction to the
required number of parking spaces from 583 to 426 parking spaces, as a Residential Infill
Project under the provisions of Section 2-304.G; and (C) Reductions to perimeter buffers
along Cross Blvd (east) from 10 feet to one foot (to existing pavement), along the east side
from seven to five feet (to existing pavement), along the west side from five to two feet (to
existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement)
and at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 feet to five feet
(to proposed pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use:
229 attached dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73 units existing to
remain; 156 units proposed), a total of 40 nursing home beds (proposed) and a total of
170 beds of assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain; 76 beds proposed).
Neighborhood Association:
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Michael Foley, representative for HarbourWood Health and Rehab Center, requested
Party Status.
Member Dame moved to grant Michael Foley Party Status. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Lou Hilton, representative for Allen Stowell, requested Party Status.
Member Dame moved to grant Lou Hilton Party Status. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Member Behar moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Planner Wayne Wells presented the request. Due to an advertising error, the CDB
continued this application from the September 16, 2008.
See Staff Report: Exhibit FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21 and Staff Memorandum: Exhibit
FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21 MEMO.
Mr. Wells said the HarbourWood Health and Rehab Center property has existing
easements. Impacts to trees on both side of Cross Boulevard are not severe. Staff opposes a
reduction to the east side setback.
Ed Armstrong, representative, said the applicant has spoken with neighboring property
owners and with City staff. He said before permits are issued, Condition #5 requires the
applicant to assist the City in resolving gating issues in relation to HarbourWood. He said the
Post Office will designate the address. He said the applicant has reached an accord with
HarbourWood to redefine property rights.
Marc Mariano, Project Manager at TBE Group, reviewed his background. Mr. Armstrong
requested that Marc Mariano be accepted as an expert witness in land use planning.
Community Development 2008-10-21 3
Member Coates moved to accept Marc Mariano as an expert witness in the field of land
use planning. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member
Carlough did not vote.
Mr. Mariano said City staff reviewed the plan as it evolved. The applicant met
extensively with two adjoining property owners and held a neighborhood meeting on June 23,
2008. He said referenced deviations have existed for more than 40 years without any known
impact on adjoining property owners. He said the primary building for the adult/senior care
facility will be four stories. However, due to site grade changes, part of the building’s west side
will be three stories and the east side will be five stories. The facility will comply with
stormwater and SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) regulations. He
said the campus will be gated; the two electronic gates on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard will not
impede access to HarbourWood. He said the project will be heavily landscaped and the
applicant tried to save as many trees as possible. He said while most of Loving Lane, which
runs through the center of the property, will remain in its current location; it will be shifted a little
to the west and south. He said to ensure the site is secured, Loving Lane will dead end at
Cross Circle, south of HarbourWood.
Mr. Mariano said three of six requested deviations are new; the others exist. He said
any nonconformities and setbacks on the north portion of the parcel will meet Code when it is
developed. He said the project requests 426 parking spaces where 583 are required. He said
the additional parking would be impractical for a garden style apartment senior living facility and
would impact the natural groundwater recharge, and require unnecessary grading and tree
removal. He said a parking sufficiency study on a similar facility in Florida had determined a
need for 378 parking spaces during peak hours. He said according to the Institute of Traffic
rd
Engineer’s Parking Generation, 3 Edition, the project needs 381 spaces. Mr. Mariano said
proposed parking is more than sufficient.
Mr. Mariano reviewed the request to reduce the easterly setback from 10 to five feet and
reduce the landscape buffer from seven to five feet, which is an existing nonconformity on Cross
Boulevard. He said a decorative fence, hedgerow, and ornamental landscaping on Cross
Boulevard will limit the project’s impact on the adjoining property owner. He said moving Loving
Lane will impact several mature trees. He said the cottage locations were tweaked to avoid
impacting trees. He said the project will not impact uses to the adjoining property to the east.
He said the two north side setback reductions being requested have existed for 40 years and
abut a concrete pad for an air conditioning system, parking space, and part of a parking lot that
serves the ALF building. He said that area will conform with Code when it is developed. He
said the adjoining property has always been vacant except for a billboard and occasional
fireworks sales.
Mr. Mariano agreed with most of the Staff Report, except for the requirement to improve
the eastern property line, and staff’s recommendation to move Cross Boulevard westward, as it
would impact trees onsite. He said moving Cross Boulevard could impact at least six trees,
which are mostly oaks.
Michael Foley, Party Status holder, representing HarbourWood Health and Rehab, said
his client had reached a compromise with the applicant. He said the applicant addressed his
client’s concerns regarding access. He said an address change would cripple HarbourWood, a
nonprofit organization, and cause a disruption to Medicare reimbursements.
Community Development 2008-10-21 4
Lou Hilton, Party Status Holder, representing Allen Stowell, requested that he be
accepted as an expert witness. He said Cross Boulevard, a private road, has existed since
1966. He said a five-foot east buffer would have a major impact on Mr. Stowells’ property. He
said this large redevelopment project should be required to meet setback requirements.
Member Tallman moved to accept Lou Hilton as an expert witness in his field. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Allen Stowell said he had owned his property since 1952. He said moving the roadway
would impact more trees than reported. He expressed concern the project did not address
water retention. He requested a 10-foot wide setback along the eastern property line to provide
more room for trees and landscaping.
Mr. Mariano said the only setback request is to the eastern property line. He said the
applicant wished to preserve as many trees as possible. He said shifting the roadway would
impact trees, compromise the project, and affect the natural beauty of the site. He counted four
trees that would be impacted by moving the roadway. Mr. Stowell indicated two trees on his
property would be impacted.
It was commented that most concerns seem to be with the setback issues. Discussion
ensued regarding moving Loving Lane with concern expressed that the 28-inch tree should be
protected. It was suggested an eight-foot setback be considered. Support was expressed for
staff’s recommendation to deny the requested five-foot setback.
Attorney for the Board Gina Grimes reviewed flexible criteria issues.
Member Adelson moved to approve Case FLD2008-05012, based on the evidence and
testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report (Exhibit FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21)
and Staff Memorandum (Exhibit FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21 MEMO), and at today’s hearing,
and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with
conditions of approval as listed in the Staff report. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
E. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning
of the meeting (Items 1 – 6):
Community Development 2008-10-21 5
1.
Item Pulled From Consent Agenda
Level Two Application
Case:
FLD2008-05013 – 100 Coronado Drive (Related to DVA2008-00001)
Owner:
K & P Clearwater Estates, LLC.
Applicant:
Clearwater Beach Resort Hotel, LLC.
Representative:
E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns,
LLP (P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-462-0365;
e-mail: eda@jpfirm.com).
Location:
2.75 acres located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and
South Gulfview Boulevard, north of Second Street.
Atlas Page:
276A.
Zoning:
Tourist (T) District.
Request:
(1) Flexible Development approval to Terminate the Status of a Nonconformity
for density (200 overnight accommodation units; where 137 overnight accommodation
units are permitted today) within the Tourist District, under the provisions of Section 6-
109.C; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 450-unit Overnight Accommodation
use (through an increase of the permitted density of 250 overnight accommodation units
from the density pool created pursuant to Beach by Design), with a lot area of 119,856
square-feet (2.75 acres), a lot width of approximately 545 feet along Coronado Drive and
227 feet along proposed Second Street, a front (east along Coronado Drive) setback of
zero feet (to building and pavement), a front (south along proposed Second Street)
setback of 18.83 feet (to building), a front (west and north along South Gulfview
Boulevard) setback of zero feet (to building), a building height of 150 feet (to roof deck)
and either 463 valet-only parking spaces or 455 valet-only parking spaces with eight public
parking spaces at 1.028 or 1.011 parking spaces per hotel room, respectively, as well as
the allowance of a two-year time frame to submit for a building permit, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3)
To reduce the required foundation landscaping along Coronado Drive and S. Gulfview
Boulevard from five to zero feet (to building and pavement), as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (4) Vacation of a
portion of S. Gulfview Boulevard (former bridge landing).
Proposed Use:
Overnight accommodation use of a total of 450 rooms (163.6
rooms/acre on total site) and a maximum of 37,000 square-feet (0.31 FAR on total site)
of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of 150 feet (to roof deck).
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
By unanimous consent, the board accepted Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the
fields of zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general, and agreed to
enter his resume into the record.
Planner Wayne Wells reviewed the request.
See Staff Report: Exhibit FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
In response to concerns that some parking study factors had been minimized, Mr. Wells
said staff had reviewed the plan and parking studies extensively and supported the request as
submitted.
Roy Chapman reviewed his background and submitted his resume to the board.
Community Development 2008-10-21 6
Member Coates moved to accept Roy Chapman as an expert witness in the fields of
transportation and parking. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate
Member Carlough did not vote.
Roy Chapman, professional design engineer with Florida Design Consultants, said the
parking study considered demand by staff work shifts, hotel occupancy, and banquet attendees.
He said most guests will fly to the area and arrive by limousine. He said not all employees or
guests would need parking spaces. Concern was expressed that 90 parking spaces would be
insufficient for a banquet with hundreds of attendees. Mr. Chapman said some special events
could create the need for parking in adjacent lots. It was suggested additional guests may be able
to park in a planned City parking garage. Concern was expressed that parking is an issue at the
beach and may be insufficient for this project. Mr. Chapman said the application exceeds Code
requirements. He said it would be impossible to provide enough parking to meet every scenario.
Ed Hooper, Constance Group, said based on Mr. Chapman’s expert testimony, the project
provides sufficient parking. He said parking alternatives are nearby. He said the resort’s operator
does not want unhappy guests and will ensure valet staff is sufficient to move vehicles efficiently.
Concern was expressed that parking will be insufficient during special events. It was
stated that all necessary parking studies had been performed and that beach parking always will
be an issue during peak times. It was felt the project would be a fantastic addition to the beach
and City economy. It was recommended that staff develop an industry standard with respect to
occupancy/parking ratios for hotels.
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2008-05013 based on evidence in the
record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of approval as listed. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
2.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Level Three Application
Case:
DVA2008-00001 – 100 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2008-05013)
Owner/Applicant:
K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC.
Representative:
E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns,
LLP (P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-462-0365;
e-mail: eda@jpfirm.com).
Location:
2.75 acres located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and
South Gulfview Boulevard, north of Second Street.
Atlas Page:
276A.
Request:
Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of an amended and
restated Development Agreement between K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC (the property
owner) and the City of Clearwater.
Proposed Use:
Overnight accommodation use of a total of 450 rooms (163.6
rooms/acre on total site) and a maximum of 37,000 square-feet (0.31 FAR on total site)
of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of 150 feet (to roof deck).
Neighborhood Association:
Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
See Staff Report: Exhibit DVA2008-00001 2008-10-21
Community Development 2008-10-21 7
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case DVA2008-00001 based on
evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby adopt the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff report. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
3. Case:
FLD2008-08025 – 1160 Mandalay Point Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
James P. Gills III and Joyce P. Gills
Representative:
E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns,
LLP (P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-462-0365;
e-mail: eda@jpfirm.com).
Location:
1.24 acres located on the west side of Mandalay Point Road approximately 950
feet north of the intersection of Mandalay Point Road and Eldorado Avenue.
Atlas Page:
227A.
Zoning:
Low Density Residential (LDR) and Open Space/Recreation (OSR) Districts.
Request:
Flexible Development approval for a new single-family detached dwelling
within the Low Density Residential (LDR) District with a lot area of 53,799 square-feet,
(33,977 square-feet Open Space/Recreation (OSR) and 19,822 square-feet LDR), a lot
width of 121 feet, a reduction to the side (north) setback from 15 feet to three feet (to
pavement) and five feet (to building), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 15 feet
to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to
raised pool and building) from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and an
increase in the maximum building height from 30 feet 34 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof)
as a Residential Infill Redevelopment Project as per Community Development Code
Section 2-104.D.
Proposed Use:
Detached Dwelling.
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III.
Attorney for the Board Grimes reported that Member Behar had a conflict of interest.
See Staff Report: Exhibit FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2008-08025 on today’s Consent Agenda
based on the evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of
approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members Coates, Tallman, Dame, DiPolito,
Adelson, Acting Member Carlough, and Chair Fritsch voted “Aye.” Member Behar abstained.
Motion carried.
Community Development 2008-10-21 8
4.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case:
FLD2008-08024 – 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
Salt Block 57, LLC.
Representative:
E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns,
LLP (P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-462-0365;
e-mail: eda@jpfirm.com).
Location:
2.45 total acres (1.87 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.58 acre zoned Open
Space/Recreation District) located on the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard
approximately 500 feet northwest of Hamden Drive and directly south of Clearwater
Beach.
Atlas Page:
276A.
Zoning:
Tourist (T) District.
Request:
(1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight
accommodation units (as established by Cases FLD2005-01005, FLD2005-05047 and
FLD2007-11034); where 93 overnight accommodation units are permitted today), under
the provisions of Section 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 230-room
overnight accommodation use (hotel) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 81,450
square-feet/1.87 acres zoned Tourist District (2.45 total acres; 0.58 acre of total acreage
zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 236 feet, a front (east) setback of
2.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to
building) from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and to permit a sidewalk 10
feet seaward of the CCCL, a side (south) setback of 16 feet (to building), 1.5 feet (to
pavement) and zero feet (to privacy wall), a rear (west) setback of two feet (to building)
from the CCCL and to permit concrete patios 13 feet seaward of the CCCL, a building
height of 150 feet above Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to top of roof deck and 296 valet-only
parking spaces at 1.286 parking spaces per hotel room, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C, and three driveways
where the two northernmost driveways are spaced 110 feet apart and the two
southernmost driveways are spaced 18 feet apart, where 125 feet is required by Section
3-102 and approval of a two-year development order; and (3) including the Transfer of
Development Rights of eight total dwelling units (being converted to 13 overnight
accommodation units) previously approved and transferred under TDR2005-05022,
including four dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-
627 Bay Esplanade and three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade, under the
provisions of Section 4-1402.
Proposed Use:
Overnight accommodation use of a total of 230 rooms.
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
See Staff Report: Exhibit FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21 and Staff Memorandum: Exhibit
FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21 MEMO.
It was stated concerns regarding this case had been answered during discussion of Case
FLD2008-05013.
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2008-08024, based on evidence in the
record, including the application and the Staff Report (Exhibit FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21), and
hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with
conditions of approval as listed in Exhibit FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21 MEMO. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Community Development 2008-10-21 9
5.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case:
FLD2008-08026 – 210 Drew Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
City of Clearwater.
Representative:
Michael Quillen, PE, City Engineering (100 S. Myrtle Avenue,
Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-562-4747; fax: 727-562-4755; e-mail:
michael.quillen@myclearwater.com).
Location:
23.96 acres located along the Downtown Clearwater Harbor between Drew
Street (north) and Pierce Street (south).
Atlas Page:
286A.
Zoning:
Downtown (D) District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit a marina for 127 slips in the Downtown
(D) District with a reduction to the side (north) setback from 135.7 to 19 feet, a reduction to
the side (south) setback from 135.7 to 7.67 feet and an increase to the maximum width
from 75% of the lot width (1,017.7 feet) to 109.8% of the lot width (1,490 feet), under the
provisions of Sections 2-903.H, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603.
Proposed Use:
City Downtown Marina for 127 boat slips.
Neighborhood Associations:
Old Clearwater Bay Neighborhood and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Member Behar moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general, and to enter his resume
into the record. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member
Carlough did not vote.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request.
See Staff Report: Exhibit FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
David Gildersleeve, Wade Trim Consulting Engineers, stated his firm had worked on this
project for five years. He reviewed the approval process and discussed difficulties in arranging
the boat slips due to the site’s irregular shape and Memorial Causeway Bridge, which splits the
site. The project complies with Code and will protect seagrass beds. The project is for
recreation only, with no commercial activity proposed except for a ferry that would not be
permanently docked onsite. The renovated Harbormaster building complies with downtown
district guidelines. Concrete, to be used for the boat slips, is aesthetically pleasing, easy to
maintain, and allows the greatest opportunity for views. While no fuel dock is proposed, pump-
out facilities are planned for the north and south basins. Amenities such as laundry facilities,
showers, and restrooms will be provided. The project does not abut a residential district. With
the exception of setbacks, the project complies with all City standards. Mr. Gildersleeve said
one slip could be lost due to a setback.
Jackson Bowman, representative for Pierce 100 Condominium Association, Inc.,
requested Party Status.
Member Tallman moved to grant Jackson Bowman Party Status. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Rex Roten, President of Pierce 100 Condominium Association, requested party status.
Community Development 2008-10-21 10
Member Behar moved to grant Rex Roten Party Status. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Mark Barbee requested Party Status.
Member Coates moved to grant Mark Barbee Party Status. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Terry Sue Turner requested Party Status.
Member Dame moved to grant Terry Sue Turner Party Status. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not vote.
Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said Mr. Gildersleeve will provide his
resume and requested that he be accepted as an expert witness.
Member Coates moved to accept David Gildersleeve as an expert witness in his field.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not
vote.
The CDB recessed from 3:31 to 3:39 p.m.
Jackson Bowman, Party Status holder, objected to the marina’s location. He said
setbacks are drastic and would encroach and impact adjacent properties. He reviewed the
intent of the Preservation district and expressed concern the marina will negatively impact the
site’s Preservation area. He said the application is deficient and does not include manatee
protection. He said the southern docks are too close to Pierce 100 condominiums and noise will
affect residents.
Rex Roten, Party Status holder, opposed the project. He said 114 Pierce 100 residents
live on the water and need to be considered. He said residents are concerned about noise. He
said the marina would impact sea life that now feed and play there. He said the water and
space around Pierce 100 serve as residents’ backyards. He said Memorial Causeway Bridge
was built too close to Pierce 100. He said the economy’s downward turn should be considered.
He said the project was not in the best interest of taxpayers. He said his professional opinion as
an attorney was that the proposed marina may not be legal.
Mark Barbee, Party Status holder, resident of Pierce 100, opposed the project. He
expressed concern busses used to transport people to and from the marina would park in his
backyard. He said manatees and dolphins feed in the area. He said the project would
exacerbate noise from the Memorial Causeway Bridge.
Terry Sue Turner, Party Status holder, resident of Pierce 100, opposed the project. She
said the Memorial Causeway Bridge had spoiled the condominium’s serenity and expressed
concern that boat slips would add to the noise problem. She said the project would eliminate
public fishing from land between Pierce 100 and the designated public area and adversely affect
the marine habitat.
Mr. Wells said the water portion of the site is zoned Preservation. Marina impacts are
the same as downtown impacts. The application is consistent with the Countywide Plan. The
facility will not impact seagrasses. No seagrasses will grow beneath the floating docks. The
Community Development 2008-10-21 11
Downtown District has a mix of uses. Pierce 100 is not zoned residential. The project is more
than 100 feet closer to Pierce 100 than allowed by Code. All docks adjacent to Pierce 100
exceed setbacks required by Code. While the City tried to design the marina within required
setbacks, the project was intended to replace boat slips that have been lost. Design constraints
and boat heights dictated the size of the boat slips. Marinas are assets to many downtown
waterfronts. This marina is in harmony with the scale and character of downtown and with
adjacent properties, including Pierce 100. The project may restrict, but will not adversely
impact, adjacent waterways.
Ms. Dougall-Sides objected to Mr. Bowman’s question, as Mr. Wells had not testified
regarding adjacent property values. Mr. Wells said the application had not been submitted to
Pinellas County for review.
Mr. Gildersleeve said no specific studies were done regarding noise from sailboat masts
or the marina, however previously, a considerable study had concluded that a market existed for
this type of project, that the project would be feasible in this location, and demand would support
it. He opined that a marina use adjacent to a residential use would enhance the value of the
residential property. He said no information suggested the marina would impair the value or
hinder the use of Pierce 100. Concrete floating docks are quieter than aluminum. Marinas are
located on residential properties elsewhere without acoustical impacts. Studies regarding
marinas adjacent to residential areas were not part of the record. Applications are submitted to
Pinellas County after CDB approval. It was remarked the record indicated the application meets
all FDEP and Army Corps of Engineer requirements and the project is exempt from the
stormwater management process. Manatee protection will be addressed during FDEP and
Army Corps review.
In response to a request, Ms. Dougall-Sides said the public cannot add a study to the
record.
Assistant City Manager Rod Irwin said this project serves critical public needs. The
County Boater Access Taskforce indicated a significant and continuing loss of dock space in the
County. This project’s unique site meets a community need and links the downtown and beach.
The project enhances downtown and will improve overall economic conditions in the City. The
promenade will allow community access, and the expanded fishing pier will help mitigate noise
to adjacent property owners. Free community dockage will be provided to Clearwater residents
while they attend community events. The project also has significant community and
environmental benefits and was designed to eliminate access to basin seagrasses. Security
personnel will be on site 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Mr. Wells said the coin-operated laundry will be on the north end, away from Pierce 100.
The drop off area for the ferry will be at the intersection of Drew and Cleveland streets and at
the Harbormaster’s office. The public will be required to adhere to the City’s noise ordinance
and other applicable laws.
Mr. Roten recommended the marina be located away from Pierce 100. He said a ferry
service had failed previously. He requested denial of the application.
Mr. Bowman stated the application was deficient and did not address preservation
zoning. He suggested the project be scaled back to be consistent with Code.
Community Development 2008-10-21 12
Mr. Gildersleeve the project has been transparent. The level of detail in the application
far exceeds any dock application he reviewed when serving on the CDB. He said the City had
done a good job in being responsive to Code criteria and public concerns. He said the notion
that a marina is not a good neighbor is unfounded. He said the community will welcome the
project.
Mr. Wells said the application considers environmental issues, and includes protection of
seagrasses and manatees that requires additional review by other agencies.
Discussion ensued with comments that marinas can be good neighbors, that the area
has mixed uses, and that the project is well located and will enhance the area. It was stated
that marina areas in other cities thrive with activity. It was felt the marina will protect seagrasses
and benefit the community. Concern was expressed regarding the 100-foot setback variance.
It was felt Clearwater has been responsible with respect to manatee protection and minimum
wake zones. Confidence was expressed that the City will submit a manatee protection plan.
Mr. Wells said the setback is a function of the waterfront width. The ferry pick up point is
on the north side of the promenade. The existing fishing pier will be extended.
Member Dame moved to approve Case FLD2008-08026. The motion was duly
seconded.
It was remarked that the applicant had been super-sensitive to issues and citizens had
been very vocal. Concern was expressed that reduced setbacks crowd the residential property
and navigation is too close to the adjacent residential property.
Mr. Wells said the Belle Harbour docks are uniquely-shaped. He said the approved
referendum provided for a maximum of 140 slips; the number of slips was reduced to 127. The
City also performed a financial analysis regarding the project’s viability.
Mr. Gildersleeve said a wind and wave study also was done. Attenuators at the end of
Dock B and the furthermost dock will provide the most protection from the southwest. He said
the project’s configuration should not be changed.
Ms. Dougall-Sides requested that Member Dame restate his motion.
Member Dame restated his motion to approve Case FLD2008-08026 based on evidence
in the record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby adopt the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of approval as listed.
The seconder agreed. Members Coates, Tallman, Dame, DiPolito, and Chair Fritsch voted
“Aye.” Members Behar and Adelson voted “Nay.” Motion carried. Alternate Member Carlough
did not vote.
Community Development 2008-10-21 13
6. Case: CPA2008-09003 Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department
Request: Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City as adopted on May 18,
2000 and subsequently amended, amending the Capital Improvements Element, making
corrections and modifications pursuant to the updated schedule of the City of
Clearwater's FY2008/09 through FY2013/14 Capital Improvement Program Budget
adopted on September 18,2008, and updating the reference in Policy 32.7.6 to the
School District's Five-Year Work Program of FY2008/09 through 2012/13 as adopted by
the School Board on September 9, 2008, in accordance with Florida Statutes.
Type of Amendment: Separate submittal to State DCA - exempt from large-scale
submittal process
Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter: Sandra E. Herman, Planner III.
See Staff Report: Exhibit CPA2008-09003 2008-10-21
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case CPA2008-09003 on today's
Consent Agenda, based on evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff
Report, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the staff report.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Member Carlough did not
vote.
F. DIRECTOR'S ITEM: (Item 1)
1. Holiday Luncheon
Ms. Clayton said the December COB meeting is on December 16 at 2:00 p.m. The
board always has a holiday luncheon prior to the December meeting and supports a variety of
community organizations. Discussion ensued regarding a location and organizations.
Consensus was to share lists of organizations to support via e-mail.
G. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:28 p.m.
~~~C
Chair, Community Development Board
Community Development 2008-10-21
14
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNT'f. MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME
Behar Jordan
MAILING ADDRESS
NAME OF BOARD, OOUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE
CITY
COUNTY
o OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
o ELECTIVE
0{ APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-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, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, 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 conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing 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 WILL BE
TAKEN:
. You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 8B - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
...
..
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
. 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.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
. You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
. You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, .Iorrl:m Rp.h::u
, hereby disclose that on
Or.tohp.r 21
,20~:
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
-X. inured to the special gain or loss of James and Joyce Gills
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
, by
, which
FLD 2008-08025 - 1160 Mandalay Point Road, Clearwater, FL
A Request for a Flexible Development approval for a new single family detached dwelling came before the
Clearwater Development Board on October 21, 2008. I have been retained by James and Joyce Gills to
prepare and design the plans which are the subject of this application.
October 21 2008
Date Filed
~
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 86 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
:
CDB Meeting Date September 16, 2008
Case Number: REZ2008-07007
Addresses: 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Agenda Item: F-2
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER/APPLICANT:
BVG Acquisition, Inc.
REPRESENTATIVE:
Katherine E. Cole, Esq.; Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel &
Burns, LLP (911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756)
LOCATION:
28.35 acres more or less, located approximately 150 feet
south of Gulf to Bay Boulevard between Cross Street (east)
and Sky Harbor Drive (west).
REQUEST:
Rezoning from the Medium Density Residential (MDR)
District to the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
SITE INFORMATION
PROPERTY SIZE:
1,234,926 sq ft or 28.35 acres mol
DIMENSIONS OF THE
PROPERTY:
Irregular (approximately 1,250 feet deep)
PROPERTY USES:
Current Uses: Detached Dwellings (Independent Living Units) and
Assisted Living Facility
(
Proposed Uses:Detached DwellingsIndependent Living Units), Assisted
Living Facility and Nursing Home [Life Care Center]
PLAN CATEGORY:
Current Category: Residential Medium (RM)
Proposed Category: Residential Medium (RM)
ZONING DISTRICT:
Current District: Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Proposed District: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 1 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
EXISTING
SURROUNDING USES:
North: Restaurants and Retail Sales
South: Mobile Home Park and Old Tampa Bay
East: Detached dwellings
West: Mobile Home Park and Clearwater Mall
ANALYSIS:
This rezoning application involves 28.35 acres of property owned by BVG Acquisition, Inc. The
subject property is located approximately 150 feet south of Gulf to Bay Boulevard between Cross
Street (east) and Sky Harbor Drive (west). It is occupied by Bayview Gardens, which includes
229 attached dwellings (independent living units) and 94 assisted living facility beds. The
property has a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) category of Residential Medium (RM) and is zoned
Medium Density Residential (MDR). The applicant is requesting to rezone the property to the
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District in order to redevelop the site into a life care
center consisting of 229 attached dwellings (independent living units), 170 assisted living facility
beds and 40 skilled nursing beds (see companion case FLD2008-05012). Nursing homes are not
permitted in the current Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning district.
The underlying Residential Medium (RM) future land plan use category allows 15 units per acre.
Independent living units are considered dwellings for the purposes of density calculations.
Assisted living facilities and nursing homes are considered residential equivalent uses and for the
purposes of calculating density, 3.0 beds are equal to one dwelling unit. Since the land use
designation of the property is not changing, the maximum allowable density of the site is not
changing (425 dwelling units or 1275 beds or some combination thereof). The proposed
redevelopment of the site will result in a total of 299 units [229 dwelling units (independent units)
and 210 assisted living and nursing beds (which is equal to 70 units)].
The maps attached to the staff report illustrate the site boundaries with a red outline, which is
based on the property survey. The City’s base maps show the existence of some upland to the
south of the outlined property. The base maps are inconsistent with the property survey and the
Engineering Department will correct the discrepancies.
I. CONSISTENCY WITH CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN [Section 4-602.F.1]
Recommended Findings of Fact
Applicable Goals, Objectives and Policies from the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan in support of
the proposed rezoning are as indicated below:
3.2.1 Policy – Land Uses on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map shall generally be
interpreted as indicated in the following table. The intensity standards listed in the table
(FAR – floor area ratio; ISR – impervious surface ratio) are the maximum allowed for each
plan category, except where otherwise permitted by special area plans or redevelopment
plans approved by the City Commission. Consequently, individual zoning districts, as
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 2 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
established by the City’s Community Development Code, may have more stringent intensity
standards than those listed in the table but will not exceed the maximum allowable intensity
of the plan category, unless otherwise permitted by approved special area plans or
redevelopment plans.
Excerpt from Table
MAX. DENSITY/
PRIMARY CONSISTENT
PLAN INTENSITY PER
USES PER PLAN ZONING
CLASSIFICATIONPLAN
CATEGORYDISTRICTS
CATEGORY
Medium Density Residential
Residential Medium Medium Density 15 Dwelling
(MDR); Medium High Density
(RM) Residential Units Per Acre
Residential (MHDR);
16.1.1 Policy – Maintain sufficient residentially zoned acreage, of varying densities and locations,
to accommodate the existing and future housing needs of the City of Clearwater.
Recommended Conclusions of Law
As stated earlier, the property has a future land use plan designation of Residential Medium (RM).
The Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code specifies that the
proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) zoning district is consistent with the
Residential Medium (RM) category. The Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District
provides a wider range of residential equivalent uses to be accommodated on this property and
enables a continuum of care to be provided in the proposed redevelopment. The Medium High
Density Residential (MHDR) District is located adjacent to the west of the site and is consistent
with the commercial and residential categories found to the north and east. The proposed
rezoning is therefore consistent with the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan.
II. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTY/CHARACTER OF THE
CITY & NEIGHBORHOOD [Sections 4-602.F.2, 4-602.F.3 & 4-602.F.4]
Recommended Findings of Fact
Gulf Boulevard Corridor
Gulf to Bay Boulevard is a six-lane roadway with a center turn lane, which carries vehicular traffic
between Tampa and Clearwater Beach. The surrounding area is characterized by commercial and
residential uses. The area has a mixture of commercial and residential plan categories that allow
for 15 (Residential Medium) to 30 (Residential High) dwelling units per acre.
Immediately to the north of the subject property is retail sales and service, restaurants, a nursing
home and a church. The property has zoning designations of Commercial (C) and Institutional (I)
with underlying future land use plan designations of Commercial General (CG) and Institutional
(I).
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 3 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
To the east are detached dwellings, Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning and a Residential
Medium (RM) future land use plan category. To the south of the subject property is Old Tampa
Bay.
To the west is a nursing home, fire station, Clearwater Mall and a mobile home park. There are
zoning designations of Institutional (I), Office (O), and Mobile Home Park (MHP) and future land
use plan categories of Institutional (I) Commercial General (CG), Residential Office General
(R/OG), and Residential Low Medium (RLM).
Section 2-401 of the Community Development Code, titled “Intent and purpose” states:
The intent and purpose of the Medium High Density Residential District ("MHDR") is to
protect and preserve the integrity and value of existing, stable residential neighborhoods of
medium high density while at the same time, allowing a careful and deliberate
redevelopment and revitalization of existing neighborhoods in need of revitalization or
neighborhoods with unique amenities which create unique opportunities to increase
property values and the overall attractiveness of the City.
Recommended Conclusions of Law
The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding residential, commercial, and
institutional uses. The proposed MHDR zoning district will be in character with the surrounding
properties and is consistent with the surrounding zoning. Furthermore, the existing use of the site
is consistent with the requirements of the proposed MHDR District and will enable the
revitalization of this site.
III. SUFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES [4-602.F.5]
Recommended Findings of Fact
As stated earlier, this rezoning application involves 28.35 acres of property. Based on a maximum
allowable density of 15 dwelling units per acre in the existing Residential Medium (RM) category
and proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) zoning district, the property could
support 425 dwellings units/1,275 beds. The proposed redevelopment of the site will result in a
total of 299 units [229 dwelling units (independent living units) and 210 assisted living and
nursing beds (which is equivalent to 70 units)].
Roadways
Specific uses in the current and proposed zoning districts have been analyzed for the number of
vehicle trips that could be generated based on the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Manual,
as well as the specific proposal submitted in the companion case FLD2008-05012 (see agenda
item F.1).
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 4 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
Net Increase
of PM Peak
Trips
Net Increase PM (compared to
Daily of Average PM Trips Peak the existing
Uses Residential Units Trips Daily Trips Average Rate Trips development)
Existing MDR District
As Currently Developed
Continuing Care
323 living
Retirement
accommodations
Community
(1)
(229 units + 94
(2.91 trips/
beds) 940 N/A 0.29 94 N/A
accommodation)
Existing MDR District
Maximum Development Potential
Residential Units
(2)
425 units 2,490 N/A 0.52 221 127
(3)
(5.86 trips/unit)
Assisted Living
Facility
(4)
1,275 3,493 N/A 0.38 484 390
(5)
(2.74 trips/bed)
Proposed MHDR District
Proposed Development
Continuing Care
439 living
Retirement
accommodations
Community
(1)
(229 units + 170
(2.91 trips/
beds + 40 beds) 1277 N/A 0.29 127 33
accommodation)
Proposed MHDR District
Maximum Development Potential
Residential Units
(2)
425 units 2,490 0 0.52 221 127
(3)
(5.86 trips/unit)
Assisted Living
Facility
(4)
1,275 3,493 N/A 0.38 484 390
(5)
(2.74 trips/bed)
th
(1) Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation 7 Edition Land Use 255, Continuing Care Retirement
Community – traffic generation is based on the total living units (units, rooms and beds) – not based on units as
determined by the City’s method for calculating density for residential equivalent uses.
th
(2) Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation 7 Edition Land Use 230, Res. Condo/Townhouse
(3) Total dwelling units per acre permitted by the underlying Residential Medium (RM) future land use category of 15
units per acre - 15 x 28.35 acres = 425 units.
th
(4) Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation 7 Edition Land Use 254, Assisted Living – traffic
generation is based on the number of occupied beds – not based on units as determined by the City’s method for
calculating density for residential equivalent uses.
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 5 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
(5) Total beds permitted by the underlying Residential Medium (RM) future land use category – 425 maximum
allowable units x 3 beds = 1275 beds.
The 2007 Transportation Level of Service (LOS) manual from the Pinellas County Metropolitan
Planning Organization assigned the Gulf to Bay Boulevard segment between Sky Harbor Drive
and Hampton Road a LOS of F. This proposed rezoning does not alter the maximum
development potential of the site, however, it does expand the available allowable uses to include
nursing homes and residential shelters. The site is currently developed with independent and
assisted living units and is not developed to the maximum allowed. The proposed redevelopment
will expand the number of assisted living facility units and add nursing beds as well but will not
approach the maximum allowed by the current future land use category. Based on the ITE Trip
Generation Manual the proposed redevelopment of the site will result in an increase of 33 PM
Peak trips compared to the existing development. This increase is minor and will not negatively
impact the LOS for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. In the event the site is redeveloped with either
residential uses or a development with more residential equivalent uses than proposed, a traffic
study would need to be submitted at the time of site plan review to ensure that transportation
concurrency requirements are met.
Mass Transit
The Citywide LOS for mass transit will not be negatively affected by the proposed zoning atlas
amendment. The total miles of fixed route service will not change; the subject site is located
along an existing transit route and headways are less than or equal to one hour.
Water
As no change is proposed to the underlying future land use designation, the proposed rezoning
will not impact the City’s current LOS for water. Although redevelopment may generate a
greater demand for water, the City has adequate capacity to serve any increases.
Wastewater
As no change is proposed to the underlying future land use designation, the proposed rezoning
will not impact the City’s current LOS for wastewater. Although redevelopment may create more
wastewater the City has adequate capacity to serve any increases.
Solid Waste
As no change is proposed to the underlying future land use designation, the proposed rezoning
will not impact the City’s current LOS for solid waste disposal. Although redevelopment may
create additional solid waste, the City has adequate capacity to serve any increases.
Recreation and Open Space
Impact fees may be required. This fee is addressed through the site plan process and any required
payment would be due prior to the issuance of building permits.
Recommended Conclusions of Law
Based upon the findings of fact, it has been determined that the traffic generated by this rezoning
will not negatively impact the existing LOS to the surrounding road network. Further, there is a
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 6 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
minimal impact to water, wastewater and solid waste service. Open space and recreation facilities
and mass transit will not be affected by the proposed zoning atlas amendment.
IV. LOCATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES [Section 4-602.F.6.]
Recommended Findings of Fact
The location of the proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District boundaries is
logical. It is compatible with the adjacent zoning districts located to the immediate north, east,
and west and to the south is Old Tampa Bay. The district boundaries are appropriately drawn in
regard to location and classifications of streets, ownership lines, existing improvements and the
natural environment.
Approval of this zoning atlas amendment does not guarantee the right to develop on the
subject property.
Transportation concurrency must be met, and the property owner will have to
comply with all laws and ordinances in effect at the time development permits are requested.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
An amendment of the zoning atlas from the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District to the
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District for the subject property is requested. The
property exceeds the minimum lot area and lot width requirements for attached dwellings, an
assisted living facility and a nursing home. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the existing
neighborhood and is compatible with the existing future land use category and reflects the current
use of the property.
The proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District is consistent with the City
Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with the surrounding area, does not conflict with the needs
and character of the neighborhood and City, does not require nor affect the provision of public
services, and the boundaries are appropriately drawn.
APPROVAL
Based on the above analysis, the Planning Department recommends of the
following action on the request:
Amend the zoning atlas designation of 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard from the Medium
Density Residential (MDR) District to the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District.
Prepared by Planning Department staff: _______________________________
Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III
Attachments:
Application
Location Map
Aerial Photograph
Future Land Use Map
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 7 of 8
EXHIBIT REZ2008-07007 2008-10-21
Zoning Map
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
Site Photographs
Community Development Board – September 16, 2008
REZ2008-07007 – Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Number: FLD2008-05012
Agenda Item: D2
Owner/Applicant: BVG Acquisition Inc.
Representative: Marc Mariano and Bryan Zarlenga, Tampa Bay Engineering Group Inc.
Address: 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval for the redevelopment of the overall 31.12
acre-property zoned Commercial (C) District, Office (O) District and
proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District (companion
rezoning Case No. REZ2008-07007) to permit a total of 229 attached
dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73 units existing to remain; 156
units proposed), a total of 40 nursing home beds (proposed) and a total of
170 beds of assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain; 76 beds
proposed); (A) In the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 2.45
acres, a lot width of 200 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard (north) and a
total of 210 feet along Cross Blvd, a front (north) setback along Gulf to
Bay Blvd of four feet (to existing sign) and 28 feet (to existing pavement),
a front (east) setback along Cross Blvd of one-foot (to existing pavement),
a front (north) setback along Cross Blvd of 25 feet (to proposed
guardhouse), a side (east) setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a
side (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a side (north)
setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and a building height of 81 feet
(to roof deck of existing assisted living facility building), as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the Commercial (C)
District, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; (B) In the proposed
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a lot area of
28.33 acres, a lot width along Sky Harbor Drive of 282 feet, a reduction
to the front (west) setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to 21 feet (to
existing building), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to five
feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback at the
southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet
(to proposed pavement), an increase to building height from 30 to 82 feet
(to top of roof of proposed building) and a reduction to the required
number of parking spaces from 583 to 426 parking spaces, as a
Residential Infill Project under the provisions of Section 2-304.G; and (C)
Reductions to perimeter buffers along Cross Blvd (east) from 10 feet to
one-foot (to existing pavement), along the east side from seven to five feet
(to existing pavement), along the west side from five to two feet (to
existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to
existing pavement) and at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing
home parcel from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed pavement), as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Commercial (C) District, Office (O) District and Medium Density
Residential (MDR) District (proposed to be rezoned to Medium High
Density Residential [MHDR] District under Case No. REZ2008-07007)
CURRENT FUTURE Commercial General (CG), Residential/Office General (R/OG) and
LAND USE CATEGORY: Residential Medium (RM)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:229 Attached Dwellings (Independent Living Units) and a
94-bed Assisted Living Facility
Proposed Use: 229 Attached Dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73
units existing to remain; 156 units proposed), a total of
40 Nursing Home beds (proposed) and a total of 170
beds of Assisted Living Facility (94 beds existing to
remain; 76 beds proposed)
EXISTING North: Commercial (C) District
SURROUNDING Retail sales, restaurant and automobile service station uses
ZONING AND USES: South: N/A
Water (Tampa Bay)
East: Commercial (C) and Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Districts
Restaurant, detached dwelling and vacant land
West: Commercial (C), Medium High Density Residential (MHDR),
Institutional (I) and Mobile Home Park (MHP) Districts
Retail sales, nursing home, fire station and mobile home uses
UPDATE:
Due to an advertising error, the CDB continued this application from the September 16, 2008, to the
October 21, 2008, CDB meeting.
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 31.12 total acres is generally located at 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (south side of Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard between Cross Boulevard [east] and Sky Harbor Drive [west]). The overall site has three
zoning districts, including 2.45 acres in the northeast corner of the site adjacent to Cross Boulevard zoned
Commercial (C) District, 0.34 acres in the northwest corner of the site adjacent to Sky Harbor Drive zoned
Office (O) District and the remaining 28.33-acres zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) District. The
area that is zoned C District is currently developed with an eight-story, 94-bed Assisted Living Facility
(ALF) that will not be changed with this proposal. The area zoned O District is currently vacant land and
the balance of the site, currently zoned MDR District, is developed with 62 single-story, attached dwelling
buildings with a varying number of units in each building (total of 229 units) that have existed since the
mid-1960’s. The site is heavily wooded.
On December 14, 2001, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved Case No. FL 01-10-33, a
request to Terminate the Status of Nonconformity for the existing 94-bed ALF in the northeast corner of
the subject property. The owners had anticipated selling off the northeast 2.45 acres with this ALF to a
separate entity (which has not occurred).
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
The adjacent HarbourWood Nursing Home was originally part of the subject property and has the same
address as the subject property (2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard). On April 21, 1994, City Council approved
a Zoning Atlas Amendment (Case Number Z94-02) to Multiple-Family Residential “Sixteen” (RM-16) for
this 2.71-acre area to increase the allowable density to permit the construction of a 120-bed nursing facility
at this site. On January 5, 1996, the final site plan for Bayview Nursing Pavilion was approved which
reflected the amended zoning district. Since then this facility functioned and operated with the approved
density. With the adoption of the Community Development Code in January 21, 1999, the RM-16 zoning
district was reclassified as the MDR District. The MDR District does not specifically authorize nursing
homes as an allowable use in the District. As a result, the Bayview Nursing Pavilion became a
nonconforming use. Intending to sell the nursing home to a separate entity, the owners requested a rezoning
of the 2.71-acre area from MDR District to MHDR District for the purpose of having the nursing home as
a conforming use (permitted in the MHDR District) under Case No. Z 01-05-01. This was subsequently
rezoned by City Council and later sold to a separate entity. Since this nursing home (now the
HarbourWood Nursing Home) does not front on a public road, the nursing home is accessed by an access
easement. There are also other easements that provide for utilities and drainage, as well as for signage at
the entrance on Sky Harbor Drive.
Those properties immediately adjacent to the north that are on the south side of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard are
zoned C District and are developed with a restaurant and retail sales uses. The property immediately west
of the ALF building is zoned C District and is currently vacant. Properties to the north across Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard are zoned C District and are developed with a variety of commercial uses, including restaurants,
retail sales, an automobile service station and vehicle sales. The property to the east across Cross
Boulevard is developed with a restaurant adjacent to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (zoned C District). The
balance of the adjacent property to the east is zoned MDR District and is primarily vacant, but does include
three detached dwellings close to the water. Properties to the west are developed with retail sales uses
(Clearwater Mall; zoned C District), a City Fire Station (zoned Institutional (I) District) and a mobile home
park (zoned Mobile Home Park (MHP) District).
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to redevelop the site by replacing 44 of the existing 62 attached dwelling buildings with a
new, state-of-the-art building that will provide high quality adult living services to its residents. The
existing eight-story, 94-bed ALF building in the northeast corner of the site (zoned C District) will be
retained, as well as 18 of the existing attached dwelling buildings containing 73 units along the northern
and western portions of the site. These existing buildings to be retained as part of this development
proposal may be replaced in the future, but any future proposal will need to meet Codes in effect at that
future time. The proposal includes the construction of a new building that will have 138 attached dwelling
units, 76 ALF beds and 40 nursing home beds. The majority of the property is currently zoned MDR
District, which does not permit nursing home uses. In order to permit the inclusion of the 40 nursing home
beds within the new building, the applicant is requesting to rezone the area from MDR District to MHDR
District, which permits nursing home uses (Case No. REZ2008-07007).
The development proposal includes a side setback reduction for that portion of the property requested to be
rezoned to MHDR District along the east property line from 10 feet to five feet (to existing pavement) and
on the west side at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet (to
proposed pavement). The proposal also includes a height increase from 30 to 82 feet for the new building
and the construction of a total of nine duplex attached dwelling buildings along the southern portion of the
site closer to the water (six duplex buildings) and just south of the existing ALF building (three duplex
buildings). These duplex buildings will provide residents with the highest level of independent living and
will include garage parking.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
The development proposal further includes the retention of the vehicular circulation pattern through the
private drives generally as they presently exist, the gating of the property with a manned entry gate south of
Cross Boulevard and the installation of gates on Cross Circle to the south of the HarbourWood Nursing
Home and north of the drive that goes out to Sky Harbor Drive, as well as the relocation of Loving Lane
from south of the HarbourWood Nursing Home, where it presently exists on the HarbourWood Nursing
Home property, to south of the HarbourWood Nursing Home property.
The development proposal’s compliance with the various development standards of the Community
Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Density: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum residential density for properties with a
designation of Commercial General (CG) land use is 24 dwelling units per acre. Pursuant to CDC Section
2-1001.1, the maximum residential density for properties with a future land use plan designation of
Residential/Office General (R/OG) is 15 dwelling units per acre. Finally, pursuant to CDC Section 2-
401.1, the maximum residential density for properties with a future land use plan designation of Residential
Medium (RM) is 15 dwelling units per acre. Based on the size of each land use area of the site, a
maximum of 487 dwelling units are possible on this overall site. When ALF and nursing home beds are
equated to dwelling units (70 units), coupled with the existing/proposed 229 attached dwellings, a total of
299 dwelling units are proposed under this proposal, which is consistent with the Countywide Future Land
Use Plan with regard to the maximum allowable density.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable I.S.R. in
the Commercial General (CG) category is 0.95. Pursuant to Section 2-1001.1 (Residential/Office General
[R/OG] category) and Section 2-401.1 (Residential Medium [RM] category) of the Community
Development Code, the maximum allowable I.S.R. in these two land use categories is 0.75. The overall
existing I.S.R. is 0.382, while the proposed I.S.R. is 0.431 (based on the overall land area with CG, R/OG
and RM land use categories), which is consistent with the Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704 (C District), there is no minimum lot area
and width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use. Comparatively, for those uses listed in
CDC Table 2-704, the minimum lot area ranges from a low of 3,500 square feet to as much as 40,000
square feet, while the minimum lot width ranges from a low of 30 feet to as much as 200 feet. That portion
of the subject property zoned C District is approximately 106,722 square feet (2.45 acres) in area and has
a lot width of 200 feet along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (north) and a total of 210 feet along Cross Boulevard.
The lot area and lot width for this portion of the proposal is consistent with these Code provisions.
Likewise, pursuant to CDC Table 2-404 (MHDR District), there is no minimum lot area or lot width for a
Residential Infill Project use. Comparatively, for uses listed in CDC Table 2-404, the minimum lot area is
generally 15,000 square feet, while the minimum lot width is generally 150 feet. For that portion of the
property proposed to be rezoned to MDR District, this is 28.33 acres in area with a lot width along Sky
Harbor Drive of 282 feet. The lot area and lot width for this portion of the proposal is consistent with
these Code provisions.
It should be noted that the selling off of the 2.71-acre nursing home area did not trigger the requirement to
file a subdivision plat, as a subdivision is the division of a lot into three or more lots. However, should
there be a desire to sell off another portion of the property, a subdivision plat will be required to be filed
and approved by the City (such as the possibility of selling off the area containing the high-rise ALF
commercially-zoned portion of this site).
Minimum Setbacks: Due to the value of the proposed improvements, in accordance with CDC Section 3-
1401.B.3, the subject property must be brought into full compliance with the parking requirements of the
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
Code, which includes required setbacks. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704 (C District), there are no required
setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use. However, from a comparative standpoint,
for those uses in CDC Table 2-704, the minimum front setback ranges between 15 – 25 feet, the minimum
side setback ranges between 0 – 10 feet and the minimum rear setback ranges between 10 – 20 feet. An
ALF use is not listed in the C District, and although its status as a nonconforming use was terminated
through Case No. FL 01-10-33 in 2001, there are no comparative setbacks for an ALF in the C District.
The proposal includes a front (north) setback along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard of four feet (to existing sign)
and 28 feet (to existing pavement), a front (east) setback along Cross Boulevard of one-foot (to existing
pavement), a front (north) setback along Cross Boulevard of 25 feet (to proposed guardhouse), a side (east)
setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a side (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement) and a
side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement). With the exception of the proposed guardhouse,
which has been designed to be set back 25 feet from the front property line at Cross Boulevard, all setbacks
are to existing improvements (sign or pavement). Along the eastern property line, the site abuts an existing
restaurant. The side setback to pavement within the Commercial District along the east property line south
of Cross Boulevard should follow the side setback the CDB approves for the proposed MHDR District
area (see discussion below).
Likewise, pursuant to CDC Table 2-404 for the proposed MHDR District, required setbacks for a
Residential Infill Project use are 10 – 25 feet front, 0 – 10 feet side, and 0 – 15 feet rear. The proposal
includes a reduction to the front (west) setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to 21 feet (to existing
building), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to five feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction
to the side (west) setback at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet
(to proposed pavement). The applicant is not proposing to redevelop the northern area at this time. The
request to reduce the front setback adjacent to Sky Harbor Drive to 21 feet recognizes the existing location
of the attached dwelling building. Adequate buffering exists at this location to this building to mitigate any
negative impacts.
Along the eastern property line, the site abuts an existing detached dwelling on primarily vacant property.
The existing pavement of the internal drive for this property is located five feet from the eastern property
line. The proposal includes the installation of a six-foot high decorative fence as well as the installation of
landscaping for buffering purposes within this existing five-foot wide area. The applicant is requesting a
reduction to the required side setback to the existing five feet along this eastern property line. It should be
noted that under the existing Medium Density Residential (MDR) District the side setback is only five feet.
The increase to the required side setback of 10 feet, and the resultant request to reduce the side setback to
five feet along this east side property line, is a result of the applicant’s request to rezone this portion of the
property to MHDR District to permit the nursing home component. While there exist established trees in
close proximity to this eastern property line and pavement, it is Staff’s determination that the 10-foot
setback along this eastern property line can be provided due to the requirement to meet current Code
requirements. Staff does acknowledge that the roadway has existed at this location at the five-foot setback
since the mid-1960’s and has not caused any negative impacts to-date (without the buffer landscaping
proposed with this application). In order to provide the full 10-foot setback, the existing roadway and
parking area on the west side of the roadway would need to be moved westward five feet. While there will
be impacts to existing trees on both the east and west side of this roadway, these impacts are not severe
enough to damage the adjacent existing trees. As such, Staff cannot support the requested reduction to the
side setback at this location along this eastern property line.
The proposal includes a reduction to the side (west) setback at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing
home parcel from 10 to five feet (to proposed pavement) due to the proposed realignment of Loving Lane.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
A six-foot high decorative fence and extensive landscaping is proposed adjacent to the HarbourWood
Nursing Home. Staff does not have an issue with the reduction to the side setback at this location.
In the future, the applicant intends to redevelop the existing ALF area, zoned C District, in the northeast
corner of the site and the northern and western portion of the site where existing attached dwellings are
presently being retained. These existing areas have structures close to property lines not meeting required
setbacks. Staff does not generally have a problem with not bringing some of these existing areas into full
compliance with required setbacks at this time, but expects full compliance in the future when these areas
are redeveloped.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-404, the allowable height for a Residential Infill
Project is 30 feet, but this height may be varied based on compliance with the Residential Infill Project
criteria.
The proposal includes a height increase from 30 to 82 feet. This site has substantial changes in existing
grades. The applicant has calculated the average contour level for this site at 12 feet. The proposed
building is primarily a four-story building. Due to slopes on this site, the east side of the building will have
a garden level, which will be five stories on this side of the building. A portion of the west side of the
building is designed with only three floors. The overall height of 82 feet is also measured to the highest top
of towers for the new building. From the average grade level, the building is 70.5 feet to the top of the
parapet roof. Some of the towers above the roof are for elevators, stairs and mechanical rooms (which by
Code may be a maximum of 16 feet above the flat roof), while others are purely decorative. The adjacent
HarbourWood Nursing Home is two stories in height and the commercial uses along Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard are generally one-story in height. The detached dwelling to the east of the property is one-story
in height and the mobile homes to the west of this site are also one-story in height. The adjacent fire station
appears more as a two-story building due to the height necessary for the fire trucks. As stated earlier, the
existing ALF building on this site is a total of eight-stories, although it would be viewed from Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard as seven stories. The existing ALF building is 81 feet in height to the flat roof deck. With the
grade changes of the site, where the highest grades are close to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, coupled with the
existing commercial buildings fronting on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard screening views of the proposed building,
the impact of this building will not appear as tall as it is advertised. The location of the building is more
toward the middle to southern portion of the site, further reducing the height impacts from Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard. Staff finds the proposed new building compatible with the surrounding uses and the heights of
these adjacent uses.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-404, the minimum off-street parking required for
Residential Infill Projects is two spaces per dwelling unit, but the standard is a guideline that may be varied
based on the Residential Infill Project criteria of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes a total of 229
attached dwelling units (independent living units) and a total of 116 new beds within the ALF and nursing
home. These ALF and nursing beds equate to 39 dwellings based on conversion ratio of three beds
equaling one dwelling unit. The 229 attached dwelling units and 39 equivalent dwelling units for the ALF
and nursing home beds total 268 units. At two spaces per dwelling unit, a total of 536 parking spaces are
required for the residentially zoned area. At a comparative parking ratio of one off-street parking space for
each two beds in the ALF in the C District (94 existing beds), there are an additional 47 off-street parking
spaces required. For all uses on the subject property, there are a total of 583 required off-street parking
spaces.
The development proposal includes a reduction to the required number of off-street parking spaces from
583 to 426. The applicant has submitted a Parking Sufficiency Study that has analyzed the existing
conditions and the proposed development relating to parking demand. There are a total of 307 existing
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
parking spaces serving the existing 229 attached dwelling units and 94 ALF beds in the high-rise structure
at the northeast corner of the site. The proposal includes a total of 426 off-street parking spaces to support
all of the end-users of the site (existing to remain and new units). Based upon the existing number of beds
and dwelling units, as compared to the proposed number of beds and dwelling units, a total of 505 off-
street parking spaces would be required by current Code for the existing conditions, versus a total of 583
off-street parking spaces for the proposed conditions. The Study indicates that the existing parking
provided in close proximity to the existing uses of the site is 0.49 spaces per bed for the existing ALF and
0.87 spaces per dwelling unit for the attached dwellings. With the proposal, the proposed off-street parking
for the existing ALF will remain at 0.49 spaces per bed, proposed off-street parking for the attached
dwellings to remain in the northern and western portions of the site not being redeveloped will have 1.15
spaces per dwelling unit, proposed parking for the proposed nursing home and ALF beds will have 0.50
spaces per bed and the new attached dwellings will have 1.52 spaces per dwelling unit. The Study also
analyzed parking needs for a similar senior living facility in Gainesville, Florida, and based upon the
rd
Institute of Traffic Engineer’s Parking Generation, 3 Edition. The Study concludes that these
comparative analyses confirm that the parking provided under this proposal will exceed the parking
demands for residents, guests and facility staff. Planning Staff agrees with the findings of the Parking
Sufficiency Study.
The existing development fronts on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, Cross Boulevard and Sky Harbor Drive.
Cross Boulevard extends only 150 feet south of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and dead ends into this
development. Cross Boulevard provides access to the parking area north of the existing ALF building and
access to the Village Inn Restaurant at the southeast corner of this intersection. Cross Boulevard otherwise
continues southerly onto the subject property as a private drive (Cross Circle). Cross Circle provides
access to units around the perimeter of the property, including the HarbourWood Nursing Home, and to
Sky Harbor Drive. An interior drive (Loving Lane) bifurcates the property to the east and south of the
HarbourWood Nursing Home. The proposal includes retaining the vehicular circulation pattern through
the private drives in their basic locations as they presently exist as well as gating the property with a
manned entry gate south of Cross Boulevard, and relocating Loving Lane from south of the HarbourWood
Nursing Home, where it presently exists on the HarbourWood Nursing Home property, to south of the
HarbourWood Nursing Home property. This relocation will convert the existing Loving Lane on the south
side of the HarbourWood Nursing Home into a dead end drive. The proposal also includes the installation
of gates on Cross Circle to the south of the HarbourWood Nursing Home and on Cross Circle north of the
drive that goes out to Sky Harbor Drive. The installations of these gates continue to provide access for the
HarbourWood Nursing Home from Sky Harbor Drive. However, access from Cross Boulevard to the
HarbourWood Nursing Home will be severed. As stated earlier, the HarbourWood Nursing Home and
Bayview Gardens developments share the same 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard address. There do exist
building permit issues due to both properties having the same address. Either the address for the
HarbourWood Nursing Home or the address for the subject property should be changed to eliminate this
confusion. However, changing the address for the HarbourWood Nursing Home poses significant
operational issues for the nursing home due to Medicare payment schedules and regulations, as an address
change means Medicare payments would be halted for approximately three months. During this time the
address is being approved and changed by Medicare, the nursing home would need to float their operating
cost by the nursing home, placing a significant burden on the owners/management of the HarbourWood
Nursing Home. This address issue continues to be unresolved. Staff has recommended a condition of
approval that this address issue be acceptably resolved prior to the issuance of any permits for this project.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be
screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. The applicant is proposing
mechanical equipment to be located on the flat roof of the new building, where parapet roofs will screen
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 7 of 7
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
such mechanical equipment. The location of mechanical equipment for the nine new duplex units is not
indicated on the plans, but may be expected to be located on the ground. The mechanical equipment for
these duplex units must be screened from view in accordance with Code requirements and should be
included as a condition of approval. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with the
Code with regard to screening of outdoor mechanical equipment.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the driveway
intersection with Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct
views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility
triangles. The proposed site and landscape design meets this requirement.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-911, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities,
including individual distribution lines, shall be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not
practicable. The civil site plan for this proposal indicates that all on-site electric and communication lines
for the new building will be placed underground in conformance with this Code requirement. Existing
overhead utilities for the buildings along the north and west sides being retained will remain overhead until
these areas are redeveloped.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D.1, this site is required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer
along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, a 10-foot wide landscape buffer along both Cross Boulevard and Sky
Harbor Drive, a 10-foot wide buffer (or seven-foot wide with a decorative fence/wall) adjacent to
nonresidential uses and a 10-foot buffer adjacent to attached dwellings or like uses. This proposal includes
reductions to perimeter buffers along Cross Boulevard (east) from 10 feet to one-foot (to existing
pavement), along the east side from seven to five feet (to existing pavement), along the west side from five
to two feet (to existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement) and
at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed
pavement).
Due to the deteriorating condition of the attached dwelling buildings on this campus, the redevelopment of
this site has been crafted from a site and building design to maintain site roadway circulation in their
current locations to minimize loss of tree canopy. The site is heavily wooded with primarily oaks. Instead
of creating many buildings across this campus similar to what exists, the applicant has chosen to create one
new building with multiple stories to minimize the impacts on these existing trees. While there will be
efficiency from a building standpoint to having the residents in one building, there is also site efficiency
with this design by minimizing the building footprint on the site. Parking areas for the new building will be
landscaped to meet Code requirements.
Due to the value of the proposed improvements, in accordance with CDC Section 3-1202.A.3, the subject
property must be brought into full compliance with the landscape requirements of the Code. The proposal
is to construct a new building with the new parking areas meeting those landscape requirements. There are
existing areas of the site that are not proposed for redevelopment where landscaping does not meet these
current Codes. In the future the applicant intends to redevelop the existing ALF area, zoned C District, in
the northeast corner of the site and the northern and western portion of the site where existing attached
dwellings are being retained. These existing areas have structures close to property lines within required
buffers. The applicant is enhancing landscaping along the frontages adjacent to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
and Sky Harbor Drive, as these areas are those viewed by the traveling public along these roadways. Staff
does not generally have a problem with not bringing some of these existing areas into full compliance at
this time, but expects full compliance in the future when these areas are redeveloped.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
Adjacent to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, the existing parking lot for the ALF building is set back 28 feet from
the front property line, exceeding the 15-foot required landscaped buffer. This existing parking lot is
screened from view of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Cross Boulevard by a six-foot high masonry wall.
Existing landscaping on the outside of this screen wall is being enhanced along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, as
this is the primary entrance to this property. Since the pavement of this parking lot exists one-foot off the
front property line of Cross Boulevard, the request includes a reduction to the required 10-foot landscape
buffer along this roadway, as there is little area for enhanced landscaping. The existing hedge on the
outside of the screen wall is being retained. Likewise, this existing parking lot is located two feet from the
west property line, encroaching into the required five-foot perimeter buffer. There is an existing hedge and
other landscaping on the west side of this parking lot. The property to the west of this existing parking lot
is currently vacant (except for a billboard).
Along the eastern property line, the site abuts an existing restaurant and primarily vacant property zoned
for attached dwellings. A 10-foot wide perimeter buffer, or seven-foot wide with a decorative fence/wall, is
required along this eastern property line adjacent to nonresidential uses. Adjacent to attached dwellings or
like uses (which Staff is considering the primarily vacant property to the east), a 10-wide perimeter buffer
is required. The existing pavement of the internal drive for this property is located five feet from the
eastern property line. The proposal includes the installation of a six-foot high decorative fence as well as
the installation of a continuous hedge and trees (planted where there are gaps within the existing tree
canopy) within this existing five-foot wide area along the east property line. The applicant is requesting a
reduction to the required buffer along this property line from seven feet adjacent to the restaurant and from
10 feet for the primarily vacant property to the existing five-foot width. Any decision by the CDB
regarding the buffer width along the east property line should be made in concert with the decision on the
required side setback along this eastern property line (see also discussion under “Minimum Setbacks”
above). While there exist established trees in close proximity to this eastern property line and pavement, it
is Staff’s determination that the seven-foot wide and 10-foot wide buffer (and side setback to pavement)
along this eastern property line can be provided. Staff does acknowledge that the roadway has existed at
this location at a five-foot distance since the mid-1960’s and has not caused any issues to-date. In order to
provide the full seven-foot wide and 10-foot wide buffer, the existing roadway and parking area on the west
side of the roadway would need to be moved westward two to five feet (depending on the decision regarding
the required side setback to be applied). While there will be impacts to existing trees on both the east and
west side of this roadway, these impacts are not severe enough to damage the adjacent existing trees. As
such, Staff cannot support the requested reduction to the perimeter buffer at this location along this eastern
property line. Any approval of this application should include a condition requiring the full seven-foot and
10-foot wide buffer along this eastern property line.
The applicant is enhancing the perimeter buffer along the western property line adjacent to the City’s Fire
Station, HarbourWood Nursing Home and the mobile home park. The required 10-foot wide buffer is
being maintained along this western property line, except in one location. The proposal includes a
reduction to the perimeter buffer from 10 to five feet at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home
parcel for the realignment of Loving Lane. A six-foot high decorative fence is proposed adjacent to the
HarbourWood Nursing Home. Extensive landscaping is proposed along the common property line with the
nursing home. An existing six-foot chain link fence along the west property line adjacent to the mobile
home park will be retained and extensive landscaping installed as part of the perimeter buffer to screen
views of adjacent buildings and parking spaces. Staff does not have any issues with the reduction to the
buffer width at this location.
As part of the City’s landscape re-inspection process, landscape materials have died or been removed
without permits and have not been replaced to comply with approved landscape plans on file with the City,
as identified under Case No. CDC2008-02198. Replacement of these landscape materials will be required
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 9 of 9
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
as part of the proposed construction of the improvements under this proposal, unless it is determined by the
Planning Department that replacement should be initiated at an earlier date.
Solid Waste: With this redevelopment proposal, the applicant is proposing a compactor solid waste
dumpster within an enclosure on the west side of the new building as part of the loading area. Trash
throughout the campus will be collected by maintenance employees and disposed in the compactor. The
proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
Signage: The subject property currently includes a monument-style, freestanding sign on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard west of Cross Boulevard and a monument-style, freestanding sign within a landscape median
within the entrance driveway at Sky Harbor Drive. These signs are intended to be retained, but with a face
change to reflect the name change to Bella Terra on the Bay.
Environmental Features: The site contains a tidal inlet/creek that is located at the southeast corner of the
property, actually extending onto the property to the east, and meandering northward through the site to the
west of the existing ALF building. This environmental feature of the site is located within FEMA flood
zone AE. No residential building, existing or proposed, is located within the FEMA Flood Zone AE.
Additionally, no assisted living facility or nursing home beds are located within a designated Coastal Storm
Area nor the area inundated by a category two hurricane. The applicant is providing the required wetland
buffers along this tidal inlet/creek.
Water/Sewer: The applicant needs to continue to work with the Engineering and Fire Departments to
resolve water, sewer and fire line issues. There are issues with the water distribution system that may
develop stagnation problems and looping the water main through the site to Sky Harbor Drive may resolve
these issues. The proposal includes sanitary sewer lines designed under stormwater ponds, which is not
desired. Additionally, a looped unrestricted water line for fire hydrants is necessary for this site. Prior to
the issuance of any permits, the applicant must resolve these issues with the Engineering and Fire
Departments.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There is an active Code Enforcement case for this property dealing with noncompliant landscaping
(CDC2008-02198). Any approval of this application will require the installation of landscaping to bring
the site back into compliance.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 10 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and criteria as
per CDC Sections 2-701.1 and 2-401.1 and Tables 2-704 and 2-404:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Density 24 dwelling units per acre in CG land 299 dwelling units X
use; 15 dwelling units per acre in
R/OG and RM land use categories
(maximum of 487 dwelling units)
I.S.R. 0.95 in CG land use; 0.75 in R/OG 0.431 overall X
and RM land use categories
1
Minimum N/A C District: 2.45 acres; X
Lot Area MHDR (proposed) and O Districts:
28.33 acres
1
Minimum N/A Gulf-to-Bay Blvd: 200 feet X
Lot Width Cross Blvd: 210 feet (total)
Minimum Front:
12
Setbacks
C District: N/A Gulf-to-Bay Blvd (north): X
4 feet (to existing sign); and
28 feet (to existing pavement)
Cross Blvd (east):
1-foot (to existing pavement)
Cross Blvd (north):
25 feet (to proposed guardhouse)
12
MHDR District: 10 – 25 feet Sky Harbor Drive (west): X
21 feet (to existing building)
Side:
12
C District: N/A East: X
5 feet (to existing pavement)
West:
2 feet (to existing pavement)
North:
Zero feet (to existing pavement)
12
MHDR District: 0 – 10 feet East: X
5 feet (to existing pavement)
North:
23 feet (to existing building)
West:
10 feet (to existing building; and
5 feet (to pavement)
Rear:
1
C District: N/A N/A (part of applicant’s property - no X
separate lots)
1
MHDR District: 0 – 15 feet 72 feet (to building) X
12
Maximum C District: N/A 81 feet (to roof deck of existing ALF X
Height building)
12
MHDR District: 30 feet 82 feet (measured to the highest top X
of towers for the new building)
2
Minimum Two spaces per dwelling unit 426 parking spaces X
1
Off-Street (total of 583 required parking spaces)
Parking
1
Based on Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project and Residential Infill Project standards
2
See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 11 of 11
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 12 of 12
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-704.C (Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations X
from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the X
proposed development
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate
compliance with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;
or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of
a working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted
in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following
design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
??
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
??
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
??
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
??
Building stepbacks; and
??
Distinctive roofs forms.
??
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1
See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 13 of 13
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-404.F (Residential Infill Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is X
otherwise impractical without deviations from one or more of the following:
intensity; other development standards.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties.
3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district. X
4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent lands X
uses.
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking X
are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of
the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole
1
See analysis in Staff Report
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent
properties.
1
See analysis in Staff Report
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meetings of June 5, 2008, and August 7, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and
conclusions of law:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 14 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
Findings of Fact. The Planning Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and
requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to
support the following findings of fact:
1. The 31.12 total acres is located generally at 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (south side of Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard between Cross Boulevard [east] and Sky Harbor Drive [west]);
2. The overall site has three zoning districts, including 2.45 acres in the northeast corner of the site
adjacent to Cross Boulevard zoned Commercial (C) District, 0.34 acres in the northwest corner of the
site adjacent to Sky Harbor Drive zoned Office (O) District and the 28.33-acre balance zoned Medium
Density Residential (MDR) District;
3. There is a companion request to rezone the MDR District to Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District under REZ2008-07007 to permit the nursing home beds desired under this proposal;
4. The area zoned Commercial District is currently developed with an eight-story, 94-bed Assisted Living
Facility (ALF), which is not proposed to be changed. The area zoned Office District is currently
vacant land with no buildings located on it. The balance of the site currently zoned MDR District is
developed with 62 one-story, attached dwelling buildings with varying number of units in each building
(total of 229 units) that have existed since the mid-1960’s;
5. The existing eight-story, 94-bed ALF building in the northeast corner of the site (zoned Commercial
District) will be retained with this proposal, as well as 18 of the existing attached dwelling buildings
containing 73 units along the northern and western portions of the site;
6. The proposal includes the construction of a new building that will have 138 attached dwelling units, 76
ALF beds and 40 nursing home beds;
7. The proposal includes a height increase from 30 to 82 feet for the new building. This site has
substantial changes in existing grades with the average contour level for this site at 12 feet. The
overall height of 82 feet is measured to the highest top of towers for the new building. From the
average grade level, the building is 70.5 feet to the top of the parapet roof;
8. The proposal also includes the construction of nine duplex attached dwelling buildings along the
southern portion of the site closer to the water and just south of the existing ALF building;
9. In the Commercial District, there are no required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project use;
10. The proposal includes a front (north) setback along Gulf-to-Bay Blvd of four feet (to existing sign) and
28 feet (to existing pavement), a front (east) setback along Cross Blvd of one-foot (to existing
pavement), a front (north) setback along Cross Blvd of 25 feet (to proposed guardhouse), a side (east)
setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a side (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement) and
a side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement);
11. In the proposed MHDR District, required setbacks for a Residential Infill Project use are 10 – 25 feet
front, 0 – 10 feet side and 0 – 15 feet rear. The proposal includes a reduction to the front (west)
setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to 21 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the side (east)
setback from 10 to five feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction to the side (west) setback at the
southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet (to proposed pavement);
12. The proposed change to the zoning of the property to MHDR District to permit the nursing home beds
within the proposed new building increases the side setback to 10 feet, whereas the existing MDR
District side setback is five feet;
13. The minimum required parking for Residential Infill Projects is two parking spaces per dwelling unit,
but the standard is a guideline that may be varied based on the Residential Infill Project criteria of
Section 2-404.F;
14. For all uses on the subject property, the number of overall required spaces totals 583 parking spaces.
The proposal includes a reduction to the required number of parking spaces from 583 to 426 parking
spaces. The applicant has submitted a Parking Sufficiency Study that has analyzed the existing
conditions and the proposed development relating to parking demand;
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 15 of 15
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
15. This site is required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, a 10-foot wide
landscape buffer along Cross Boulevard and Sky Harbor Drive, a 10-foot wide buffer (or seven-foot
wide with a decorative fence/wall) adjacent to nonresidential uses and a 10-foot buffer adjacent to
attached dwellings or like uses;
16. This proposal includes reductions to perimeter buffers along Cross Blvd (east) from 10 feet to one-foot
(to existing pavement), along the east side from seven to five feet (to existing pavement), along the west
side from five to two feet (to existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to
existing pavement) and at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 feet to five
feet (to proposed pavement);
17. There is an active Code Enforcement case for this property dealing with noncompliant landscaping
(CDC2008-02198).
Conclusions of Law. The Planning Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the
following conclusions of law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Sections 2-701.1 and 2-401.1
and Tables 2-704 and 2-404 of the Community Development Code;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-704.C of the
Community Development Code;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-404.F of the
Community Development Code;
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as
per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code; and
5. The proposal is compatible with the adjacent land uses.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the Flexible Development
approval for the redevelopment of the overall 31.12 acre-property zoned Commercial (C) District, Office
(O) District and proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District (companion rezoning Case
No. REZ2008-07007) to permit a total of 229 attached dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73 units
existing to remain; 156 units proposed), a total of 40 nursing home beds (proposed) and a total of 170 beds
of assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain; 76 beds proposed); (A) In the Commercial (C)
District with a lot area of 2.45 acres, a lot width of 200 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard (north) and a
total of 210 feet along Cross Blvd, a front (north) setback along Gulf to Bay Blvd of four feet (to existing
sign) and 28 feet (to existing pavement), a front (east) setback along Cross Blvd of one-foot (to existing
pavement), a front (north) setback along Cross Blvd of 25 feet (to proposed guardhouse), a side (east)
setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a side (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a side
(north) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and a building height of 81 feet (to roof deck of existing
assisted living facility building), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the Commercial (C)
District, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; (B) In the proposed Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District with a lot area of 28.33 acres, a lot width along Sky Harbor Drive of 282 feet, a
reduction to the front (west) setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to 21 feet (to existing building), a
reduction to the side (west) setback at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to
five feet (to proposed pavement), an increase to building height from 30 to 82 feet (to top of roof of
proposed building) and a reduction to the required number of parking spaces from 583 to 426 parking
spaces, as a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of Section 2-304.G; and (C) Reductions to
perimeter buffers along Cross Blvd (east) from 10 feet to one-foot (to existing pavement), along the west
side from five to two feet (to existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement) and at the southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 feet to five feet (to
proposed pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G,
with the following conditions:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 16 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
Conditions of Approval:
1. That approval of this application is subject to the approval of the companion rezoning Case No.
REZ2008-07007;
2. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations approved by
the CDB;
3. That a subdivision plat be required to be approved for any future division of this property into
additional lots;
4. That the existing eight-story ALF building zoned Commercial District be limited to a maximum of 94
beds and the new building be limited to a maximum of 76 ALF beds and 40 nursing home beds;
5. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant assist the City with resolving the address issue
for the adjacent HarbourWood Nursing Home created by the gating of the subject property;
6. That approval of this application does not waive full compliance with the parking, landscaping or
underground utility requirements for the ALF area zoned Commercial District and the northern and
western areas where existing attached dwellings are being retained as part of this application, however,
full compliance is expected when these existing areas are redeveloped in the future;
7. That landscaping that has died or been removed without approvals identified under Case No.
CDC2008-02198 be replaced as part of the construction of these improvements, unless it is determined
by the Planning Department that replacement be initiated at an earlier date;
8. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, civil and landscape plans be revised to provide a 10-foot
wide setback and landscape buffer along the eastern property line;
9. That, prior to the issuance of building permits for the duplex buildings, mechanical equipment for these
new duplex buildings be screened from view in accordance with Code requirements;
10. That existing overhead utilities serving buildings along the north and west sides of the site that are
being retained under this proposal be placed underground when these areas are redeveloped;
11. That any freestanding signage be a monument-style sign, designed to match the exterior materials and
colors of the building, and be limited to a maximum height of six feet;
12. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant resolve water, sewer and fire line issues with
the Engineering and Fire Departments;
13. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, compliance with all requirements of General Engineering,
Traffic Engineering and Stormwater Engineering be met; and
14. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
??
Aerial Map
??
Zoning Map
??
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
??
Photographs of Site and Vicinity
??
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 17 of 17
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05012 2008-10-21
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Gulf to Bay 2855 Bella Terra on the Bay (C, O & MDR) -
10.21.08 CDB - WW\Gulf to Bay 2855 Staff Report - 10.21.08 CDB.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05012 – Page 18 of 18
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Members of the Community Development Board
FROM:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
DATE:
October 21, 2008
RE:
FLD2008-05012, 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
To clarify the Staff recommendation, since Staff is not supporting a reduction to the setback and
landscape buffer requirements along the east property line, the following underlined language is
added:
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the Flexible
Development approval for the redevelopment of the overall 31.12 acre-property zoned Commercial
(C) District, Office (O) District and proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District
(companion rezoning Case No. REZ2008-07007) to permit a total of 229 attached dwellings
(Independent Living Units) (73 units existing to remain; 156 units proposed), a total of 40 nursing
home beds (proposed) and a total of 170 beds of assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain;
76 beds proposed); (A) In the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 2.45 acres, a lot width of
200 feet along Gulf to Bay Boulevard (north) and a total of 210 feet along Cross Blvd, a front
(north) setback along Gulf to Bay Blvd of four feet (to existing sign) and 28 feet (to existing
pavement), a front (east) setback along Cross Blvd of one-foot (to existing pavement), a front
(north) setback along Cross Blvd of 25 feet (to proposed guardhouse), a side (east) setback of five
feet (to existing pavement), a side (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a side (north)
setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and a building height of 81 feet (to roof deck of existing
assisted living facility building), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the
Commercial (C) District, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; (B) In the proposed Medium
High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a lot area of 28.33 acres, a lot width along Sky
Harbor Drive of 282 feet, a reduction to the front (west) setback along Sky Harbor Drive from 25 to
21 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the side (west) setback at the southeast corner of the
adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 to five feet (to proposed pavement), an increase to building
height from 30 to 82 feet (to top of roof of proposed building) and a reduction to the required
number of parking spaces from 583 to 426 parking spaces, as a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-304.G; and (C) Reductions to perimeter buffers along Cross Blvd (east)
from 10 feet to one-foot (to existing pavement), along the west side from five to two feet (to
existing pavement), along the north side from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement) and at the
southeast corner of the adjacent nursing home parcel from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed
pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, and
DENIAL
of a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to five feet (to existing pavement) and a
reduction to the perimeter buffers along the east side from seven to five feet (to existing pavement),
with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That approval of this application is subject to the approval of the companion rezoning Case
No. REZ2008-07007;
2. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations
approved by the CDB;
3. That a subdivision plat be required to be approved for any future division of this property into
additional lots;
4. That the existing eight-story ALF building zoned Commercial District be limited to a
maximum of 94 beds and the new building be limited to a maximum of 76 ALF beds and 40
nursing home beds;
FLD2008-05012 – Page 1 of 2
5. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant assist the City with resolving the
address issue for the adjacent HarbourWood Nursing Home created by the gating of the
subject property;
6. That approval of this application does not waive full compliance with the parking,
landscaping or underground utility requirements for the ALF area zoned Commercial District
and the northern and western areas where existing attached dwellings are being retained as
part of this application, however, full compliance is expected when these existing areas are
redeveloped in the future;
7. That landscaping that has died or been removed without approvals identified under Case No.
CDC2008-02198 be replaced as part of the construction of these improvements, unless it is
determined by the Planning Department that replacement be initiated at an earlier date;
8. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, civil and landscape plans be revised to provide a
10-foot wide setback and landscape buffer along the eastern property line;
9. That, prior to the issuance of building permits for the duplex buildings, mechanical
equipment for these new duplex buildings be screened from view in accordance with Code
requirements;
10. That existing overhead utilities serving buildings along the north and west sides of the site
that are being retained under this proposal be placed underground when these areas are
redeveloped;
11. That any freestanding signage be a monument-style sign, designed to match the exterior
materials and colors of the building, and be limited to a maximum height of six feet;
12. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant resolve water, sewer and fire line issues
with the Engineering and Fire Departments;
13. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, compliance with all requirements of General
Engineering, Traffic Engineering and Stormwater Engineering be met; and
14. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any
permits.
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Gulf to Bay 2855 Bella Terra on the Bay (C, O &
MDR) - 10.21.08 CDB - WW\Gulf to Bay 2855 Memo - Revised Staff Recommendation 10.21.08.doc
FLD2008-05012 – Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Number: FLD2008-05013 (Related to DVA2008-00001)
Agenda Item: E1 (Related to F1)
Owner: K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC
Applicant: Clearwater Beach Resort Hotel, LLC
Representative: E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LP
Address: 100 Coronado Drive, 201, 215 and 219 S. Gulfview Blvd.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: (1) Flexible Development approval to Terminate the Status of a
Nonconformity for density (200 overnight accommodation units; where
137 overnight accommodation units are permitted today) within the
Tourist District, under the provisions of Section 6-109.C; (2) Flexible
Development approval to permit a 450-unit Overnight Accommodation
use (through an increase of the permitted density of 250 overnight
accommodation units from the density pool created pursuant to Beach by
Design), with a lot area of 119,856 square feet (2.75 acres), a lot width
of approximately 545 feet along Coronado Drive and 227 feet along
proposed Second Street, a front (east along Coronado Drive) setback of
zero feet (to building and pavement), a front (south along proposed
Second Street) setback of 18.83 feet (to building), a front (west and
north along South Gulfview Boulevard) setback of zero feet (to
building), a building height of 150 feet (to roof deck) and either 463
valet-only parking spaces or 455 valet-only parking spaces with eight
public parking spaces at 1.028 or 1.011 parking spaces per hotel room,
respectively, as well as the allowance of a two-year time frame to submit
for a building permit, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3) To reduce the required
foundation landscaping along Coronado Drive and S. Gulfview
Boulevard from five to zero feet (to building and pavement), as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G; and (4) Vacation of a portion of S. Gulfview Boulevard (former
bridge landing).
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District
CURRENT FUTURE LAND Resort Facilities High (RFH)
USE CATEGORY:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Vacant (temporary City public parking lot)
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of a total of 450 rooms
(163.6 rooms/acre on total site) and a maximum of
37,000 square feet (0.31 FAR on total site) of amenities
accessory to the hotel at a height of 150 feet (to roof
deck).
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 1 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
EXISTING North: Open Space/Recreation Pier 60
SURROUNDING ZONING (OS/R) District
AND USES: South: Tourist (T) District Overnight Accommodations
(Aqualea/Hyatt – under construction)
East: Tourist (T) District Vacant, Retail Sales and Overnight
Accommodations
West: Open Space/Recreation Beach and Gulf of Mexico
(OS/R) District
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 2.75 acres is located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and South Gulfview
Boulevard, north of Second Street. The subject property is currently vacant, but used as a temporary City
public parking lot. The properties were previously developed with various motels/hotels (Days Inn, Beach
Towers Motel, Spyglass Motel and Golden Beach Motel) and numerous retail sales and restaurant uses.
The overall property includes several vacated and dedicated rights-of-way (see next paragraph for
description).
On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved a Flexible Development
application for the construction of a 350-unit hotel with associated amenities and 75 attached dwellings as
a mixed-use development (FLD2004-02013). The City Council approved a companion Development
Agreement on February 17, 2005 (Case No. DVA2004-00001). These development approvals authorized
the following:
Use of 250 hotel rooms from the Beach by Design density pool;
??
Maximum building height of 150 feet;
??
Vacation of a portion of the right-of-way for Gulfview Boulevard between Coronado Drive and
??
proposed Second Street;
Vacation of the First Street right-of-way between Coronado Drive and Gulfview Boulevard;
??
Dedication of right-of-way for proposed Second Street between Coronado Avenue and Gulfview
??
Boulevard; and
Dedication of right-of-way for Coronado Drive between proposed Second Street and Gulfview
??
Boulevard.
On May 17, 2005, the CDB approved a Flexible Development application amending the prior project to
modify the location of an elevated pedestrian walkway over South Gulfview Boulevard (FLD2004-
02013A). On March 16, 2006, City Council approved an amendment to this original Development
Agreement (DVA2004-00001A), which dealt with issues associated with Beach Walk construction and the
st
timing of the dedication of land for Relocated 1 Street (to be known as Second Street once constructed), as
st
well as for the construction of Relocated 1 Street.
Pier 60 and the public parking lot is to the north of this property and is zoned Open Space/Recreation
(OS/R) District. Properties to the east across Coronado Drive are zoned Tourist (T) District and are (or
were) developed with overnight accommodation uses and retail sales and service uses. At least two of the
properties are currently vacant, as the former overnight accommodation uses have been demolished, but
presently contain temporary construction trailers for the Aqualea/Hyatt project. The Aqualea/Hyatt
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 2 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
project, which is a 250-room hotel with 18 attached dwellings, is located to the south across proposed
Second Street and is zoned Tourist (T) District.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to redevelop the site with a 450-unit/room destination resort hotel, consisting of 250
traditional hotel units and 200 vacation/interval ownership (timeshare) units. The proposed resort will
include amenities accessory to the hotel, including a restaurant, lounge, retail sales, pool, spa, ballroom and
meeting space. The proposal changes the architectural style from the prior approved project to a tropical
modern architecture, which is appropriate and aesthetically pleasing for this beachfront property and
complements the tropical vernacular envisioned in Beach by Design, and incorporates pedestrian access
components to Beach Walk. The proposal eliminates the approved pedestrian bridge to Clearwater Beach,
instead providing for the construction of a loggia and a palm court pedestrian area on the west side. The
building mass consists of a four-story base, two 150-foot towers and a 95-foot tall connecting element that
links the towers and base together. The building design incorporates a curved façade on the north side
where public meeting space, ballroom and spa softens and transitions the visual appearance moving east to
west. On the north end, the curved mass of the base is reinforced by one of the two 150-foot towers (hotel
tower). The towers incorporate a similar design where the towers are oriented on an east-west axis with the
tower units angled to give occupants unimpeded views of the Gulf. Timeshare units are located in the
southern tower. A 95-foot tall connecting element is aligned on a north-south axis and includes timeshare
units, providing a transition between the vertical towers and the horizontal base. Smaller scale decorative
trellises, awnings, louvered panels and translucent railings soften the mass of the building. On the west
side of the building the mass of the base is carved back to create a curved public palm court. The palm
court is a landscaped focal point for the hotel, located both on the subject property and within the S.
Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way that will be a walkable part of Beach Walk. A covered loggia is located
along the west side of the building on the subject property, providing pedestrian access to the resort hotel,
the retail shops and restaurant. The palm court and covered loggia are slightly elevated providing a
viewing platform toward the Gulf of Mexico for public use.
The building is designed with the porte cochere and the lower lobby on the grade level. This lowest level
provides building entrance areas on the east side, storage areas and 218 parking spaces. Level 1 is the main
lobby level and includes hotel administrative offices, restaurant, bar, retail sales areas and a 10,500 square-
foot grand ballroom. Level 2 provides an employee office area, 149 parking spaces and eight timeshare
units. Level 3 provides a back of house area, a 5,000 square-foot junior ballroom, meeting rooms, 96
parking spaces and 17 timeshare units. The amenity Level 4 provides a 13,890 square-foot spa, 3,890
square-foot fitness center, 17 timeshare units, the main pool between the two towers and a small timeshare
pool in the southwest portion of the amenity deck south of the timeshare tower. Levels 5 – 9 have 24 hotel
rooms and 22 timeshare units per floor. Level 10 provides 24 hotel rooms and eight timeshare units, as
well as providing access to the rooftop recreation deck on the top of the connector portion of the building
between the two towers. Levels 11 – 14 provide 24 hotel rooms and eight timeshare units for each floor.
The Penthouse Level 15 provides 10 hotel rooms and eight timeshare units. The proposed hotel consists of
four rooftop levels – the amenity deck at 38.67 feet accessible to the guests; the spa roof (inaccessible to
guests) on the north end of the hotel tower at a height of 48.17 feet; the third being the connector element
between the two towers at a height of 95 feet that includes a recreation area for guests; and the fourth being
the roofs of the hotel and timeshare towers having a height of a maximum of 150 feet to the flat roof deck
(inaccessible to guests). That portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is separated from the
Aqualea/Hyatt building to the south by 140.67 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design minimum requirement
of a 100-foot separation. The materials and color of the building will support the tropical modern
architecture and its natural surroundings. The building will be painted sand dollar white, accented by
honed gray granite stone veneer. The window mullions, railing caps, louvered panels and trellises will be
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 3 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
arcadia silver. Balcony railings will be clear glass. The main pool area is located between the two towers
in the west center of the building to minimize noise and visual distractions to the Aqualea/Hyatt resort hotel
to the south. With the height and location of the adjacent Aqualea/Hyatt resort hotel and condominiums,
the proposed hotel design is compatible with the surrounding uses.
Parking for the hotel guests and employees is provided in a parking garage on three levels containing 463
valet-only parking spaces or 455 valet-only parking spaces with eight public parking spaces at 1.028 or
1.011 parking spaces per hotel room, respectively. The parking plan provides the two parking options,
showing the eight public parking spaces should City Council decide to retain the spaces within this garage
or to remove the eight public spaces and all parking in the garage would be private spaces. The
Development Agreement provides an option for the eight public parking spaces to be eliminated from the
parking garage for a payment in lieu of to be placed off-site. The two upper parking levels are accessed by
a ramp located just inside the building on the south side of the building, which is accessed from Second
Street. No guests or other public will access the parking garage; only valet employees will park and
retrieve vehicles from the parking garage. The parking garage will include stacked or tandem spaces,
where another car must be moved to get the stacked or tandem car out, and will employ the stacking of
vehicles in drive aisles to create additional valet spaces when necessary, resulting in a total of 568 parking
spaces in a worst case scenario (full occupancy and a large banquet).
The site is designed with two driveways on Coronado Drive. The northern driveway will be an entrance
only, providing access to the porte cochere for the valet service. A loading area is provided on the south
side of the site off Second Street, providing three loading spaces and access to the compactor for solid
waste trucks. Valet drivers will access the parking garage by a driveway provided off Second Street on the
southwest portion of the site.
The applicant is requesting a two-year development order due to market conditions. Section 4-407
specifies that an application for a building permit must be submitted within one year of the date the CDB
approves the project, unless otherwise specified under this approval.
The proposal includes the proposed vacation of the former pedestrian bridge landing at the northwest
corner of the property. This right-of-way is no longer necessary. While action on this vacation request is
solely a decision by the City Council, the request has been included with this application to show the
relationship of the proposal to street rights-of-way and to include the land area into the overall site area for
calculation purposes.
Density: Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, the maximum density for properties with a
designation of Resort Facilities High is 50 overnight accommodation units per acre. Based on the 2.75
acres zoned Tourist District, a maximum of 137 overnight accommodation units are permissible under
current regulations. The overall site was formerly developed with a total of 200 units, which was
nonconforming to current regulations. The applicant is requesting Termination of Status of Nonconformity
for density to maintain the same number of overnight accommodation units in a conforming manner (see
discussion below). Additionally, this site was originally granted 250 hotel rooms from the hotel density
pool created by Beach by Design under Case Nos. FLD2004-02013/DVA2004-00001. The overall density
for this project is 163.6 overnight accommodation units/rooms per acre.
Termination of Status of Nonconformity: The development proposal includes a request for Termination of
Status of Nonconformity for density (200 overnight accommodation units; where 137 overnight
accommodation units are permitted today). The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density has been
determined to still be valid, even though all motels/hotels on the overall property have been demolished, due
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 4 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
to the status of the approval of Case Nos. FLD2004-02013/DVA2004-00001. An important factor in this
case is the ability to retain an overnight accommodation use on the beach where many hotels/motels have
been lost to condominium (attached dwelling) construction. The criteria for Termination of Status of
Nonconformity, as per Section 6-109 of the Community Development Code and outlined in the table below,
including compliance with perimeter buffer requirements, the provision of required landscaping for off-
street parking lots and bringing nonconforming signs, lighting and accessory uses/structures into
compliance with the Code will be met with this development proposal.
Consistent Inconsistent
1. Perimeter buffers conforming to the requirements of Section 3-1202.D of the N/A
Community Development Code shall be installed.
2. Off-street parking lots shall be improved to meet the landscaping standards N/A
established in Section 3-1202.E of the Community Development Code.
3. Any nonconforming sign, outdoor lighting or other accessory structure or accessory X
use located on the lot shall be terminated, removed or brought into conformity with
this development code.
4. The comprehensive landscaping and comprehensive sign programs may be used to X
satisfy the requirements of this section.
Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District. The
temporary City public parking lot will be removed upon construction of this proposal. All proposed
parking will be within a parking garage, where landscaping is not required. Any prior nonconforming
signs, outdoor lighting or other accessory structures/uses have already been removed with the demolition of
the motels/hotels from the overall property. A Comprehensive Landscape Program has been submitted for
this proposal, as the foundation landscaping requirement is not met and reductions are requested. Should
the applicant desire attached or freestanding signage in excess of minimum Code requirements, the
Comprehensive Sign Program may be used for proposed signage.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the Community Development Code, the
maximum allowable I.S.R. is 0.95. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.92, which is consistent with the Code
provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the
minimum lot area and width for overnight accommodation uses ranges between 10,000 – 20,000 square
feet and 100 – 150 feet respectively. The subject property is 119,856 square feet (2.75 acres) in area and
has approximately 545 feet of frontage along Coronado Drive and approximately 227 feet of frontage along
proposed Second Street. The proposal is consistent with these Code provisions.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the minimum front
setback for overnight accommodations can range between zero – 15 feet, the minimum side setback can
range between zero – 10 feet and the minimum rear setback can range between zero – 20 feet. This site
encompasses an entire block of property, therefore only front setback requirements are applicable. The
proposal includes a front (east along Coronado Drive) setback of zero feet (to building and pavement), a
front (south along proposed Second Street) setback of 18.83 feet (to building) and a front (west and north
along South Gulfview Boulevard) setback of zero feet (to building). There are no required setbacks for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use.
While the proposal has been advertised with setback reductions to zero feet along Coronado Drive on the
east and along S. Gulfview Boulevard on the north and west, the building does not extend fully to the zero-
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 5 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
foot setback for the entire street frontages. Along Coronado Drive, the structural fins for the two towers
are located at a zero-foot setback. Actual floor area between these structural fins is located approximately
five feet from the property line. Balconies for units between these structural fins for the amenity Level 4
through Level 15 extend, however, to the property line. The façade of the building north and south of these
towers varies 6 – 16 feet in distance to the property line. At the porte cochere, the façade of the lobby is
approximately 46 feet from the property line, although pavement for the porte cochere is located at a zero-
foot setback. Along the north side adjacent to S. Gulfview Boulevard, only the northwest corner of the
building is located at the advertised zero-foot setback. The curved wall of the ballroom, junior
ballroom/meeting room and spa terrace is located approximately six feet to the north property line. The
building is located at a zero-foot setback along S. Gulfview Boulevard on the west side. Along the south
side adjacent to Second Street, the building is located 18.83 feet from the property line, exceeding the
required front setback of 15 feet. The previously approved project under FLD2004-02013 also included
setback reductions to zero feet along all frontage to the building. Setback reductions sought are a result of
right-of-way dedications for street relocations, provision of a dedicated turn lane on Coronado Drive and
incorporation of the project into Beach Walk. Landscaping improvements within the rights-of-way and on-
site will reduce impacts due to the reduced setbacks. Along the west side, the travel lanes for S. Gulfview
Boulevard curve away from the subject property, creating the large Beach Walk promenade area west of
the subject property, such that the setback reduction will not be visually apparent.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable height for overnight accommodation uses is 100 feet. Beach by Design permits buildings up to a
maximum of 150 feet through the use of bonus hotel units from the density pool, which this proposal has
been previously awarded. The proposed hotel consists of two towers at a height of 150 feet (a hotel tower
on the north side and a timeshare tower on the south side). A timeshare connector between the two towers,
which also extends south of timeshare tower, has been designed at a height of 95 feet. The amenity deck,
which includes the two swimming pools, is at a height of 38.67 feet. The height of the roof of the spa on
the north side of the hotel tower is 48.17 feet. That portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is
separated from the Aqualea/Hyatt building to the south by 140.67 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design
minimum requirement of a 100-foot separation. The proposed height of the lower and taller portions of the
tower is consistent and compatible with the height of the Aqualea/Hyatt project. This site is located within
the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design, which is the primary “beachfront” destination on Clearwater
Beach. The applicant has submitted documentation indicating compliance with the Beach by Design
criteria for no more than two buildings more than 100 feet in height within 500 feet of each other. The
proposal also complies with the Code requirements under the definition of “Height, Building or Structure”
for elevator and stair overruns and mechanical rooms, which are permitted to extend a maximum of 16 feet
above the otherwise permitted height. The timeshare connector between the two towers is designed to
provide a recreation area for guests. The definition of “Height, Building or Structure” permits structures
permanently affixed to the roof that permit rooftop occupancy only if such structures are within the
maximum allowable height of 100 feet. Since this timeshare connector is designed at a roof height of 95
feet and provides rooftop occupancy by guests, such structures can only be five feet in height. To ensure
any such structures envisioned with this proposal or in the future after construction is completed, any
approval of this application should be conditioned on such a structure height limitation. The design of this
project creates a form and function that will be consistent with and enhance the character of this area.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the
minimum required parking is one parking space per unit, or 450 parking spaces. Parking for the hotel
guests and employees is provided in an on-site parking garage on three levels containing either 463 valet-
only parking spaces 1.028 parking spaces per unit/room) or 455 valet-only parking spaces (1.011 parking
spaces per unit/room) with eight public parking spaces, which will be 100 percent valet parked. Full valet
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 6 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
service will be provided so that guests and overnight visitors will not have to wait for spaces or circle the
garage looking for a parking space, therefore allowing traffic to flow smoothly into the parking garage off
the public street. The 463 parking spaces will be provided on the various parking levels as follows: Grade
Level – 218 spaces; Level 2 – 149 spaces; and Level 3 – 96 spaces. On the Grade Level, one option is to
provide eight public parking spaces, located in the southwest corner of the parking garage. Depending on a
decision by City Council, and set out in the Development Agreement, the public parking spaces could be
eliminated from the parking garage under a payment in lieu of providing the spaces. Of the 463 parking
spaces provided, 162 spaces are designed as stacked or tandem spaces where another car must be moved to
get the stacked or tandem car out. The submitted Parking Study demonstrates that stacking of vehicles in
drive aisles to create additional valet spaces when necessary will result in an additional 105 parking spaces
for a total of 568 parking spaces in a worst case scenario (full occupancy and a large banquet). The
submitted Parking Study also demonstrates that adequate parking will be available for guests, visitors and
employees. The companion Development Agreement sets out a parking protocol in Exhibit M to ensure
adequate parking is available and to minimize traffic backups at the porte cochere. The owner will also
record a covenant (Development Agreement, Exhibit F) to implement a trip generation management
program prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy to reduce trips to and from the site to ensure
adequate on-site parking is available for guests and employees. The parking garage must comply with the
Building Code and have a vertical clear height for all parking garage levels of not less than seven feet
including the entrance and exit. This clear height includes any structural beams, fire sprinkler pipes and
heads, electrical conduits and lighting, drainage pipes and any other building elements.
The site is designed with two driveways on Coronado Drive. The northern driveway will be an entrance
only, providing access to the porte cochere. The porte cochere drive will be one-way only travel (north to
south), two lanes wide with a separate additional lane for buses and be serviced by valet only. Airport
shuttles, taxis and limousines will use the drop-off area under the porte cochere on Coronado Drive. A
total of 21 vehicles can be stacked within the porte cochere area. There is a valet exit from the grade level
parking garage on the north side of the porte cochere, designed to minimize vehicular movement on the
public streets. Instead of a turn lane the entire length of the project along Coronado Drive, the turn lane
starts south of the drop-off area to provide access to Second Street for both this project and the
Aqualea/Hyatt project to the south. A landscape island with public sidewalk projects into the Coronado
Drive right-of-way to the travel lanes, providing a turn lane into the porte cochere. A loading area is
provided on the south side of the site off Second Street, providing three loading spaces and access to the
compactor for solid waste trucks. This loading area is across Second Street from a similar loading area for
the Aqualea/Hyatt project on the south side of Second Street. Valet drivers will access the parking garage
by a driveway provided off Second Street on the southwest portion of the site. The applicant will construct
sidewalks of a width and material within the adjacent rights-of-way according to that specified by Beach
Walk. The sidewalk along Second Street will be partially on the subject property and an access easement
will need to be recorded for this sidewalk prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to Section 3-201.D.1 of the Community Development Code, all outside
mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting
properties. The applicant is proposing mechanical equipment to be located within mechanical enclosures
on top of the towers or on top of the flat roofs of the timeshare connector or spa, where the building
parapets will screen views of such mechanical equipment. Based upon the above, the development proposal
is consistent with the Code with regard to screening of outdoor mechanical equipment.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to Section 3-904.A of the Community Development Code, to minimize
hazards at the driveway and street intersections on S. Gulfview Boulevard, Coronado Drive and Second
Street, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 7 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility triangles. The proposed site and
landscape design meet this requirement.
Utilities: Pursuant to Section 3-911 of the Community Development Code, for development that does not
involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines shall be installed underground
unless such undergrounding is not practicable. The civil site plan for this proposal indicates that all on-site
electric and communication lines for this new building will be placed underground in conformance with this
Code requirement.
Landscaping: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D of the Community Development Code, there are no perimeter
buffers required in the Tourist District for this site. This proposal includes a reduction to the required
foundation landscaping along Coronado Drive and S. Gulfview Boulevard from five to zero feet (to
building and pavement) through the Comprehensive Landscape Program. The foundation landscaping
reductions occur at the structural fins on Coronado Drive and at the northwest corner of the building on S.
Gulfview Boulevard. The reduction to the on-site foundation landscaping requirement is most evident
along the west side of the proposed building and its loggia. However, Beach Walk promenade landscaping
adjacent to the building will act as the foundation landscaping along this building edge. The site along the
north, east and south otherwise complies with the five-foot wide foundation landscaping requirement.
The applicant has worked with City Staff to ensure proposed landscaping and sidewalk improvements both
within the City’s rights-of-way and on-site work together with the landscape design for Beach Walk to
ensure a seamless interface between this project and Beach Walk features reinforcing the pedestrian
oriented beach community. Medjool date palms will be installed along Coronado Drive and to the west
along S. Gulfview Boulevard, including the proposed palm court. Cabbage and Washington palms and
other salt-tolerant landscaping will be planted within the rights-of-way and on-site. Landscaping assists
with softening and reducing building massing to both pedestrians and motorists.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize hotel housekeeping staff to remove trash from units and transport
the trash to the trash compactor located on the south side of the property. Trash trucks will back in from
Second Street to access the compactor dumpster. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the
City’s Solid Waste Department.
Signage: No freestanding or attached signage is proposed at this time for this overnight accommodation
use. Freestanding signage in the Tourist District is restricted to a maximum height of four feet, or six feet
through a Comprehensive Sign Program. Any approval of this application should include a condition
allowing for freestanding signage, where such future freestanding signage must be a monument-style sign
meeting Code requirements and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
Additional Beach by Design Guidelines: Section B.3 requires the floorplate of any building exceeding 45
feet in height to be limited to a maximum of 25,000 square feet between 45 – 100 feet and a maximum of
10,000 square feet between 100 – 150 feet, but allows deviations to these floorplate requirements provided
the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maximum building envelop
allowance above 45 feet. The largest floorplate between 45 – 100 feet is approximately 48,212 square feet
and between 100 – 150 feet it is approximately 27,292 square feet. The applicant requests such deviations
to the floorplate restrictions. The Design Guidelines provide that no more than 60 percent of the theoretical
maximum building envelop located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. The applicant has calculated
the overall building mass between 45 – 150 feet at 38.0 percent, approximately two-thirds of the maximum
permissible.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 8 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
Section C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that
no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length.
The proposed building footprint is approximately 96,110 square feet. The project’s overall horizontal
plane dimensions are approximately 447 feet along South Gulfview Boulevard and 237 feet along the north
side, while the vertical plane is approximately 158 – 159 feet from grade to the top of the tallest roof.
None of these dimensions are equal. Modulation of the building massing also provides considerable
dimensional variation.
Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an
offset of more than five feet. Although the base extends nearly the length of the property, it is highly
articulated. Within 50 feet of the north and south ends of the building, the towers interface with the lower
structure as they reach the ground. To the east, the center of the base has structural fins that extend up
from the ground to support the building above the drop-off porte cochere and continue up to the roof of the
timeshare connector. To the west, the base is carved back to create the public palm court. The north side
is curved, creating a continuously curving façade and therefore, no plane is continuous for more than 30
feet. The two towers are oriented on an east-west axis, with the tower units angled for the occupants with
balconies to view the gulf, creating a saw tooth edge on both sides of the towers.
Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or architectural
decoration. The applicant has calculated that the north elevation is at 65 percent, the east elevation at 68
percent, the south elevation at 60 percent and the west elevation at 71 percent.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 9 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency
of the overnight accommodation use proposal with the standards as per Section Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803
of the Community Development Code:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Density 50 overnight accommodation units per 450 overnight X
acre (maximum of 137 units) accommodation units
1
(163.6OVU/acre)
I.S.R. 0.95 0.92 X
2
Lot Area 10,000 – 20,000 sf 119,856 square feet (2.75 X
acres)
2
Lot Width 100 – 150 feet 545 feet along Coronado X
Dr.; 227 feet along
nd
proposed 2 St.
23
Setbacks Front: Zero – 15 feet East (along Coronado Dr): X
Zero feet (to building and
pavement)
nd
South (along proposed 2
St): 18.83 feet (to building)
North and West (along
South Gulfview Blvd):
Zero feet (to building)
23
Height 35 – 100 feet 150 feet (to roof deck) X
3
Off-Street One space per room/unit (450 spaces Either 463 valet-only X
2
Parking required) parking spaces (1.028
parking spaces per hotel
room) or 455 valet-only
parking spaces with eight
public parking spaces
(1.011 parking spaces per
hotel room)
1
Beach by Design
Per Termination of Status of Nonconformity of 200 units/rooms and 250 units/rooms from the density pool
2
Based on Overnight Accommodation use in the Tourist (T) District
3
See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 10 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-803.C of the Community Development
Code (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations X
from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
1
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
1
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
1
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the X
proposed development
1
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate
compliance with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;
or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of
a working waterfront use.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 11 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
1
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted
in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following
design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
??
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
??
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
??
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
??
Building stepbacks; and
??
Distinctive roofs forms.
??
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1
See analysis in Staff Report
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code:
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
1
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
1
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
1
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
1
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
1
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent
properties.
1
See analysis in Staff Report
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meetings of June 5, 2008, and September 4, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and
conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 12 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
1. The 2.75 acres is located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and South Gulfview
Boulevard, north of Second Street;
2. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved a Flexible Development
application for the construction of a 350-unit hotel with associated amenities and 75 attached dwellings
as a mixed-use development (FLD2004-02013). The City Council approved a companion
Development Agreement on February 17, 2005 (Case No. DVA2004-00001);
3. On May 17, 2005, the CDB approved a Flexible Development application amending the prior project
to modify the location of an elevated pedestrian walkway over South Gulfview Boulevard (FLD2004-
02013A);
4. On March 16, 2006, City Council approved an amendment to this original Development Agreement
(DVA2004-00001A), which dealt with issues associated with Beach Walk construction and the timing
st
of the dedication of land for Relocated 1 Street (to be known as Second Street once constructed), as
st
well as for the construction of Relocated 1 Street;
5. The properties were previously developed with various motels (Days Inn, Beach Towers Motel,
Spyglass Motel and Golden Beach Motel) and numerous retail sales and restaurant uses. All of the
buildings containing these uses have been demolished;
6. The subject property is currently vacant, but used as a temporary City public parking lot;
7. The nonconforming status of the prior 200-unit hotel density has been determined to still be valid, even
though all of the motels/hotels have been demolished, due to the status of the approval of Case Nos.
FLD2004-02013/DVA2004-00001;
8. The proposal is to redevelop the site with a 450-unit/room destination resort hotel, consisting of 250
traditional hotel units and 200 vacation/interval ownership (timeshare) units and including amenities
accessory to the hotel of a restaurant, lounge, retail sales, pool, spa, ballroom and meeting space;
9. The proposal eliminates the approved pedestrian bridge to Clearwater Beach, instead providing for the
construction of a loggia and a palm court pedestrian area on the west side;
10. The building mass consists of a four-story base, two 150-foot towers and a 95-foot tall connecting
element that links the towers and base together;
11. The proposed hotel consists of four rooftop levels – one being the amenity deck at 38.67 feet; the spa
on the north end of the hotel tower at a height of 48.17 feet; the third being the connector element
between the two towers at a height of 95 feet; and the fourth being the hotel and timeshare towers
having a height of a maximum of 150 feet to the flat roof deck;
12. That portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is separated from the Aqualea/Hyatt building
to the south by 140.67 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design minimum requirement of a 100-foot
separation;
13. Parking for the hotel guests and employees is provided in a parking garage on three levels containing
463 valet-only parking spaces or 455 valet-only parking spaces with eight public parking spaces at
1.028 or 1.011 parking spaces per hotel room, respectively, which will be 100 percent valet parked;
14. Of the 463 parking spaces provided, 162 spaces are designed as stacked or tandem spaces where
another car must be moved to get the stacked or tandem car out;
15. This site was originally granted 250 hotel rooms from the hotel density pool created by Beach by
Design under Case Nos. FLD2004-02013/DVA2004-00001;
16. The proposal includes a front (east along Coronado Drive) setback of zero feet (to building and
pavement), a front (south along proposed Second Street) setback of 18.83 feet (to building) and a front
(west and north along South Gulfview Boulevard) setback of zero feet (to building);
17. The application includes a request for deviations to the floorplate restrictions;
18. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 13 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2-801.1 and Table 2-803
of the Community Development Code;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-803.C of the
Community Development Code;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as
per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code;
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design; and
5. The proposal is compatible with the adjacent land uses.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the (1) Flexible
Development application to Terminate the Status of a Nonconformity for density (200 overnight
accommodation units; where 137 overnight accommodation units are permitted today) within the Tourist
District, under the provisions of Section 6-109.C; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 450-unit
Overnight Accommodation use (through an increase of the permitted density of 250 overnight
accommodation units from the density pool created pursuant to Beach by Design), with a lot area of
119,856 square feet (2.75 acres), a lot width of approximately 545 feet along Coronado Drive and 227 feet
along proposed Second Street, a front (east along Coronado Drive) setback of zero feet (to building and
pavement), a front (south along proposed Second Street) setback of 18.83 feet (to building), a front (west
and north along South Gulfview Boulevard) setback of zero feet (to building), a building height of 150 feet
(to roof deck) and either 463 valet-only parking spaces or 455 valet-only parking spaces with eight public
parking spaces at 1.028 or 1.011 parking spaces per hotel room, respectively, as well as the allowance of a
two-year time frame to submit for a building permit, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3) To reduce the required foundation landscaping along
Coronado Drive and S. Gulfview Boulevard from five to zero feet (to building and pavement), as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (4) Vacation of a
portion of S. Gulfview Boulevard (former bridge landing), with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the approval of an amended Development
Agreement with the City (Case DVA2008-00001);
2. That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the vacation of the pedestrian bridge
landing right-of-way by the City prior to the issuance of any permits;
3. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations approved by
the CDB;
4. That application for a building permit to construct the approved project be submitted no later than
October 21, 2010, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to Section 4-407;
5. That a Declaration of Unity of Title for Condominiums be recorded in the public records prior to the
issuance of any permits;
6. That any structures permanently affixed to the roof of the timeshare connector between the two towers
or south of the timeshare tower that permit rooftop occupancy be only permitted if such structures are
within the maximum allowable height of 100 feet above BFE (five feet above the designed 95-foot
height of the roof of the timeshare connector);
7. That sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with compliance demonstrated
on plans acceptable to the Environmental Engineering Division, prior to the issuance of building
permits;
8. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the vertical clear height of all the parking garage
levels be not less than 7 feet including entrance and exit (Florida Building Code 2004, Section
406.2.2);
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 14 of 14
EXHIBIT FLD2008-05013 2008-10-21
9. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign and be designed to match the exterior
materials and color of the building. The maximum height shall be four feet, unless approved at six feet
high through a Comprehensive Sign Program;
10. That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, an easement be recorded in the public
records for the sidewalk along Second Street partially on the subject property;
11. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, compliance with all requirements of General Engineering,
Traffic Engineering and Stormwater Engineering be met;
12. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits;
and
13. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
??
Aerial Map
??
Zoning Map
??
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
??
Photographs of Site and Vicinity
??
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Coronado 0100 Clearwater Beach Resort & Hotel (T) -
10.21.08 CDB - WW\Coronado 0100 Staff Report - 10.21.08 CDB.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-05013 – Page 15 of 14
EXHIBIT DVA2008-00001 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Number: DVA2008-00001 (Related to FLD2008-05013)
Owner/Applicant: K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC
Agenda Item: F1 (Related to E1)
Representative: E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
Address: 100 Coronado Drive, 201, 215 and 219 S. Gulfview Blvd.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of an amended and
restated Development Agreement between K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC
(the property owner) and the City of Clearwater.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District
CURRENT FUTURE LAND Resort Facilities High (RFH)
USE CATEGORY:
BEACH BY DESIGN Beach Walk
CHARACTER DISTRICT:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Vacant (temporary City public parking lot)
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of a total of 450 rooms
(163.6 rooms/acre on total site) and a maximum of
37,000 square feet (0.31 FAR on total site) of amenities
accessory to the hotel at a height of 150 feet (to roof
deck)
EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District Pier 60
SURROUNDING ZONING South: Tourist (T) District Overnight Accommodations (Aqualea/
AND USES: Hyatt – under construction)
East: Tourist (T) District Vacant, Retail Sales and Overnight
Accommodations
West: Open Space/Recreation Beach and Gulf of Mexico
(OS/R) District
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 2.75 acres is located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and South Gulfview
Boulevard, north of Second Street. The subject property is currently vacant, but used as a temporary City
public parking lot. The properties were previously developed with various motels (Days Inn, Beach
Towers Motel, Spyglass Motel and Golden Beach Motel) and numerous retail sales and restaurant uses.
The overall property includes several vacated and dedicated rights-of-way.
Approved Development:
On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved a Flexible Development
application for the construction of a 350-unit hotel with associated amenities and 75 attached dwellings as
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
DVA2008-00001 – Page 1 of 4
EXHIBIT DVA2008-00001 2008-10-21
a mixed-use development (FLD2004-02013). The City Council approved a companion Development
Agreement on February 17, 2005 (Case No. DVA2004-00001). These development approvals authorized
the following:
Use of 250 hotel rooms from the Beach by Design density pool;
??
Maximum building height of 150 feet;
??
Vacation of a portion of the right-of-way for Gulfview Boulevard between Coronado Drive and
??
proposed Second Street;
Vacation of the First Street right-of-way between Coronado Drive and Gulfview Boulevard;
??
Dedication of right-of-way for proposed Second Street between Coronado Avenue and Gulfview
??
Boulevard; and
Dedication of right-of-way for Coronado Drive between proposed Second Street and Gulfview
??
Boulevard.
On May 17, 2005, the CDB approved a Flexible Development application amending the prior project to
modify the location of an elevated pedestrian walkway over South Gulfview Boulevard (FLD2004-
02013A). On March 16, 2006, City Council approved an amendment to this original Development
Agreement (DVA2004-00001A), which dealt with issues associated with Beach Walk construction and the
st
timing of the dedication of land for Relocated 1 Street (to be known as Second Street once constructed), as
st
well as for the construction of Relocated 1 Street.
Development Proposal:
The development proposal includes a companion Flexible Development application (FLD2008-05013) to
permit an overnight accommodation use of a total of 450 rooms (163.6 rooms/acre on total site) and a
maximum of 37,000 square feet (0.31 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of
150 feet (to roof deck). The current proposal includes the vacation of the former pedestrian bridge landing
area right-of-way on the northwest corner of the site and the dedication of additional right-of-way at the
intersection of S. Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive.
Development Agreement:
The proposed Development Agreement sets forth public/private obligations. The City recognizes the
economic and aesthetic benefits that will result from private development. The applicant recognizes the
benefit of public improvements that directly affect the marketability of the project and the character of the
general area surrounding the project. Since the approval of the project in 2004/2005, there have been many
changes on the beach. The Aqualea/Hyatt project to the south is under construction. The Beach Walk
project has been completed. Market conditions have changed, which have prompted a change in the type of
development proposed. The proposed Development Agreement will be in effect for a period not to exceed
ten (10) years and includes the following main provisions:
Updates the provisions of the Development Agreement to current conditions, reflecting changes due
??
to Beach Walk construction and other surrounding conditions, as well as the current proposed
development;
Provides for the vacation of Parcel J (the area where the pedestrian bridge was previously located on
??
the approved plan, which is no longer proposed);
Provides the ability to contract with the City provider for concession services on the public beach,
??
similar to the Aqualea/Hyatt project directly to the south;
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
DVA2008-00001 – Page 2 of 4
EXHIBIT DVA2008-00001 2008-10-21
Updates the public parking options to reflect the developer’s option to pay in lieu of providing the
??
parking spaces on-site;
Updates Exhibit M (Parking Protocol), due to the change in design of the project and responding to
??
Staff concerns regarding employee parking issues;
Updates the developer’s pro rata share of the Beach Walk construction to indicate what the developer
??
has paid to date and the remaining obligation to meet the prior commitment;
The currently approved Development Agreement, along with the associated resort pool units, expires
??
in 2015. This proposed amended Development Agreement does not extend this date. It does propose
to give the developer three years to commence vertical construction and the opportunity to request a
time extension from City Council extending through the 2015 date. The proposed amended
Development Agreement also requires the City to consider (but not necessarily adopt) amendments to
the previously approved vacation ordinances that expire in March 2010 if vertical construction has
not commenced.
The Community Development Board (CDB) has been provided with the most recently negotiated
Development Agreement.
The City Council may enter into Development Agreements to encourage a stronger commitment on
comprehensive and capital facilities planning, to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities for
development, to encourage the efficient use of resources, and to reduce the economic cost of development.
The CDB is required to review the proposed Development Agreement and make a recommendation to the
City Council.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of June 5, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the
Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact:
1. That the 2.75 acres is located directly south of Pier 60 between Coronado Drive and South Gulfview
Boulevard, north of Second Street;
2. That the property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future
Land Use Plan category;
3. That the development proposal is subject to the requirements of Beach by Design and the Design
Guidelines contained therein as the property is located within the Beach Walk character district.
Conclusions of Law:
1. That the Development Agreement implements and formalizes the requirements for the construction of
on-site and off-site improvements under the related site plan proposal (FLD2008-05013);
2. That the Development Agreement complies with the standards and criteria of Section 4-606 of the
Community Development Code;
3. That the Development Agreement is consistent with and furthers the Visions, Goals, Objectives and
Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and
4. That the Development Agreement is consistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of
Beach by Design and the Beach Walk character district.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
DVA2008-00001 – Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT DVA2008-00001 2008-10-21
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends the , and recommendation to
the City Council, of an amended and restated Development Agreement between K & P Clearwater Estate,
LLC (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater for the property at 100 Coronado Drive.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Development Agreement with Exhibits
??
Location Map
??
Aerial Map
??
Future Land Use Map
??
Zoning Map
??
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\DVA2008-00001 Coronado 0100 TRG Clearwater Beach LLC
(T) - 10.21.08 CDB - WW\Coronado 0100 Amened Dev. Agree. Staff Report for 10.21.08 CDB 1.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
DVA2008-00001 – Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Numbers: FLD2008-08025
Agenda Item: E.2.
Owner/Applicant: James P. Gills, III and Joyce P. Gills
Representative: Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
Address: 1160 Mandalay Point Road
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval for a new single family detached
dwelling within the Low Density Residential (LDR) District with a lot
area of 53,799 square feet, (33,977 square feet Open Space/Recreation
(OSR) and 19,822 square feet LDR), a lot width of 121 feet, a reduction
to the side (north) setback from 15 feet to three feet (to pavement) and
five feet (to building), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 15 feet
to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 15
feet to zero feet (to raised pool and building) from the Coastal
Construction Control Line (CCCL) and an increase in the maximum
building height from 30 feet 34 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) as a
Residential Infill Redevelopment Project as per Community Development
Code Section 2-104.D.
CURRENT ZONING: Low Density Residential (LDR) District
Open Space/ Recreation (OSR) District
CURRENT FUTURE Residential Low (RL)
LAND USE CATEGORY: Preservation (P)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Single Family Detached Dwelling
Proposed Use: Single Family Detached Dwelling
EXISTING North: Low Density Residential (LDR) District
SURROUNDING Single Family Detached Dwelling
ZONING AND USES: South: Low Density Residential (LDR) District
Single Family Detached Dwelling
East: None
Intracoastal Waterway
West: None
Gulf of Mexico
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 1 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 1.24 acres is located on the west side of Mandalay Point approximately 950 feet north of the
intersection of Mandalay Point Road and Eldorado Avenue. Mandalay Point Road is a private gated area
with 12 single-family residences and one vacant parcel. Mandalay Point is unique in that each lot fronts on
both the Gulf of Mexico and the intracoastal-waterway. The community character in this area is one of
large, residential, estate homes. The site contains land zoned both Low Density Residential (LDR) and
Open Space/Recreation (OSR). Currently, the site contains a 4,336 square foot single family detached
dwelling that was constructed in 1951. The finished floor elevations range from 4.91 feet to 8.94 feet above
sea level. To the west (approximately 325 feet) of the rear of the residence is the Gulf of Mexico mean high
water line, to the east (approximately 48 feet) of the front of the residence is the intracoastal-waterway
including the applicants dock and boat lifts, to both the south and north are single family detached
dwellings. The current home has a side (south) setback of 4.6 feet (to building), a side (north) setback of
9.1 feet (to building) and a rear (west) setback of two feet (to covered porch) from the Coastal Construction
Control Line (CCCL). Additionally, a wall, planter, shuffleboard court and terrazzo patio exists
approximately 24 feet seaward of the CCCL.
Development Proposal:
The proposal calls for razing the existing single family detached dwelling and redeveloping the site with a
9,798 square foot (living area) single family detached dwelling. Not included in the living area is a ground
level 5,345 square foot garage. The development proposal also includes a swimming pool and lap pool. The
new residence’s first floor will be constructed at 16.75 feet above sea level; thereby meeting current
building and flood requirements. The proposed single family dwelling will be built on a masonry pile/grade
beam foundation with masonry, concrete and steel structures forming the shell of the walls, floor and roof
above. The walls, openings and roof will be engineered to withstand category five hurricanes. The dwelling
at ground level is comprised of rough cut stone and natural materials that form the base. The upper levels
comprise cut and finished stone, stucco, smooth trim and a natural slate tile roof. Oversized gutters,
downspouts and chimney caps will be made of copper to add character as the home ages.
While this proposal meets the setback standards as available in a Level One Residential Infill
Redevelopment Project, there is a request to modify the setback requirements from the CCCL. Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 3-905 establishes within the city the CCCL as the line of reference from
which setbacks shall be measured along the Gulf of Mexico for buildings and structures in order to protect
the safety, economic, environmental, recreational and community appearance objectives of the city. It
further states that any request to modify the setback requirements contained in CDC Section 3-905 shall be
considered as an application for a Level Two approval as provided for in Article 4, Division 4; thus the
processing of this application as a Level Two Residential Infill Redevelopment Project.
Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-101.1, the maximum F.A.R. for parcels with a
future land use designation of Residential Low (RL) is 0.40. The site proposes a gross floor area of 15,510
square feet resulting in a F.A.R of 0.29. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with
the Countywide Future Land Use Plan with regard to the maximum allowable F.A.R.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-101.1, the maximum allowable I.S.R. is
0.65. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.25, which is consistent with the Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-104, there is no applicable minimum lot area
or lot width for Residential Infill Redevelopment Projects. The subject property is 53,799 square feet in
area and has a width of 121 feet both of which are in excess of the typical requirements for the use.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 2 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-104, the development standards set forth for Residential
Infill Redevelopment Projects are guidelines that may be varied based upon the flexibility criteria specified
for Residential Infill Redevelopment Projects. Those development standards call for a front setback of 10-
25 feet, side setbacks of 0-15 feet and a rear setback of 0-15 feet.
The proposed detached dwelling will be set back 48 feet from the front (east) property line. However, it
should be noted that a 24 foot wide ingress/egress easement for Mandalay Point Road exists within this
setback area, and as measured from this easement, the dwelling will have a setback of 18.3 feet.
Regarding the side setbacks, there is a request for reductions on the north side from 15 feet to three feet (to
pavement) and five feet (to building) and on the south side from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building). This
particular residential district (LDR) has large side setbacks (15 feet) whereas the other low intensity
residential districts have side setbacks of only five feet. The existing home on this site currently has side
setbacks on the south and north of 4.5 feet and nine feet respectively. Additionally, this area has an
established character of side setbacks in this range. This area is unique in the respect that all homes have
unobstructed views of the Gulf of Mexico to the west and of the intracoastal waterway to the east therefore
the community as a whole is not concerned with side setback reductions as a detriment. Of the 12
residences located on Mandalay Point Road, 10 have provided letters of support for the proposal, with the
remaining property owner unable to be located.
A reduction to the rear (west) setback of 15 feet from the CCCL to zero feet (to raised pool and building)
has been requested also. The current dwelling units covered patio is setback four feet from the CCCL and
a wall, planter, shuffleboard court and terrazzo patio exist approximately 24 feet seaward (west) of the
CCCL. Due to the overall depth of the property, approximately 450 feet, the rear setback of zero feet (to
raised pool and building) from the CCCL will not be visually apparent or impact the views of any
neighboring parcels. The CCCL is located approximately 110 feet west of the ingress/egress easement;
thereby the parcel has approximately 340 feet of additional property west of the CCCL.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-104, the maximum building height for Residential
Infill Redevelopment Projects is 30 feet. The proposed detached dwelling includes a request to increase the
maximum building height from 30 feet to 34 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof). Parcels of this size and
location lend themselves to estate size homes, which are large homes that typically require higher roofs to
provide for adequate design and engineering of the roof support system. Additionally, there are several
estate size homes located on Mandalay Point Road with roof heights greater than 30 feet. For example, the
dwelling immediately to the north of the subject property has a height of 36.75 feet (to midpoint of pitched
roof).
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-104, within the LDR District, off-street parking
is to be provided at a rate of 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit. While the exact number of parking
spaces being provided has not been depicted on the plans, the garage has an area of 5,345 square feet which
can easily accommodate the necessary parking.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at driveway
intersections with Mandalay Point Road, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct
views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility
triangles. The proposed site and landscape design meet this requirement.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 3 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-911, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities
including individual distribution lines shall be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not
practicable. The site plan for this proposal indicates that all on-site electric and communication lines for
this project will be placed underground in conformance with this Code requirement.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency
of the detached dwelling development proposal with the standards as per CDC Sections 2-101.1 and 2-102:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
F.A.R. 0.40 0.29 X
I.S.R. 0.65 0.25 X
Minimum N/A 53,799 square feet X
Lot Area
Minimum N/A 121 feet X
Lot Width
Minimum Front (east): 10 - 25 feet 48 feet (to building) X
Setbacks
Side (north): 0 - 15 feet 3 feet (to pavement)
1
5 feet (to building) X
1
Side (south): 0 - 15 feet 10 feet (to building) X
1
Rear: (west): 0 - 15 feet 0 feet (to pool and X
building) from CCCL
Maximum
Building Height 30 feet 34 feet
1
X
Minimum Off-2 spaces 2 + spaces X
Street Parking
1
The development standards for residential infill projects are guidelines and may be varied based on the criteria set forth in Section 2-104.D
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 4 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-104.D (Residential Infill
Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations X
from one or more of the following: intensity; other development standards;
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties;
3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district; X
4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent land X
uses;
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development;
6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function X
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole;
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height, off-street parking X
access or other development standards are justified by the benefits to community
character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and
the City of Clearwater as a whole.
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent
properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of September 4, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to
the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of
law:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 5 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
Findings of Fact:
1. The 1.24 acres is located approximately 950 feet north of the intersection of Mandalay Point Road and
Eldorado Avenue;
2. The property is currently developed with a single-family detached dwelling;
3. The proposal is to redevelop the site with a new 9,798 square foot single-family detached dwelling;
4. The proposal includes a lot area of 53,799 square feet (33,977 square feet Open Space/Recreation
(OSR) and 19,822 square feet LDR), a lot width of 121 feet, a reduction to the side (north) setback
from 10 feet to three feet (to pavement) and five feet (to building), a reduction the side (south) setback
from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to
raised pool and building) from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and an increase in the
maximum building height from 30 feet 34 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof); and
5. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Maximum Development Potential Standards as
per CDC Section 2-101.1;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the applicable Standards and Criteria as per CDC
Section 2-104;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-104.D;
and
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as
per CDC Section 3-913.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the Flexible Development
application for a new single family detached dwelling within the Low Density Residential (LDR) District
with a lot area of 53,799 square feet, (33,977 square feet Open Space/Recreation (OSR) and 19,822 square
feet LDR), a lot width of 121 feet, a reduction to the side (north) setback from 15 feet to three feet (to
pavement) and five feet (to building), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet (to
building), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to raised pool and building) from
the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and an increase in the maximum building height from 30
feet 34 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) as a Residential Infill Redevelopment Project as per Community
Development Code Section 2-104.D with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That the final design and color of the proposed single family detached dwelling be consistent with the
elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB;
2. That all permits from any regulatory agency be obtained prior to the issuance of any building permits;
and
3. That the applicant obtain all necessary sanitary disposal and treatment permits prior to the issuance of
any building permits.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs of Site and Vicinity
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08025 2008-10-21
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Mandalay Point 1160 Gills (LDR) - 10-21-08 CDB
SK\Mandalay Point 1160 - Development Order.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08025 – Page 7 of 6
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Numbers: FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022
Agenda Item: E3
Owner/Applicant: Salt Block 57, LLC
Representative: E.D. Armstrong III, Esquire
Address: 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight
accommodation units (as established by Cases FLD2005-01005,
FLD2005-05047 and FLD2007-11034); where 93 overnight
accommodation units are permitted today), under the provisions of Section
6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 230-room overnight
accommodation use (hotel) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of
81,450 square feet/1.87 acres zoned Tourist District (2.45 total acres;
0.58 acres of total acreage zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot
width of 236 feet, a front (east) setback of 2.5 feet (to building) and zero
feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to building) from
the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and to permit a sidewalk
10 feet seaward of the CCCL, a side (south) setback of 16 feet (to
building), 1.5 feet (to pavement) and zero feet (to privacy wall), a rear
(west) setback of two feet (to building) from the CCCL and to permit
concrete patios 13 feet seaward of the CCCL, a building height of 150
feet above Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to top of roof deck and 296 valet-
only parking spaces at 1.286 parking spaces per hotel room, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Section 2-803.C, and three driveways where the two northernmost
driveways are spaced 110 feet apart and the two southernmost driveways
are spaced 18 feet apart, where 125 feet is required by Section 3-102 and
approval of a two-year development order; and (3) including the Transfer
of Development Rights of eight total dwelling units (being converted to 13
overnight accommodation units) previously approved and transferred
under TDR2005-05022, including four dwelling units from 557 and 579
Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-627 Bay Esplanade and three
dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade, under the provisions of Section
4-1402.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District
CURRENT FUTURE LAND Resort Facilities High (RFH)
USE CATEGORY:
BEACH BY DESIGN South Beach/Clearwater Pass District
CHARACTER DISTRICT:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 1 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Vacant
Proposed Use: 230 Overnight Accommodation units
EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District Beach
SURROUNDING ZONING South: Tourist (T) District Attached dwellings
AND USES: East: Tourist (T) District Restaurant; Retail sales and services;
Overnight accommodations
West: Preservation (P) District Water
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 2.45 total acres (1.87 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.58 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District)
is located on the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard approximately 500 feet northwest of Hamden
Drive and directly south of Clearwater Beach. The former Adam’s Mark Hotel on this property closed due
to damage sustained during Hurricane Jeanne in September 2004. The Community Development Board
(CDB) has taken the following actions since the closing of the former Adam’s Mark Hotel:
On April 19, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved with 10 conditions Case
??
Nos. FLD2005-01005/SGN2005-01016 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for
density to allow the continuation of an existing 217-room/unit hotel (where 74 rooms/units were
permitted at that time) and for height to allow the existing 155-foot high building (where a
maximum height of 150 feet is permitted today); (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a
217-room/unit overnight accommodation use with reductions to setbacks, an increase to building
height to 155 feet (to existing roof deck) and a reduction to required parking from 217 to 201
spaces (existing), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project; (3) Reduction to the required
interior landscape area, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program; and (4) Comprehensive Sign
Program approval (SGN2005-01016).
On August 16, 2005, the CDB approved with 18 conditions Case Nos. FLD2005-
??
05047/TDR2005-05022 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217
overnight accommodation units existing to be converted to 104 dwelling units; where 56 dwelling
units were permitted at that time); (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed use of 112
attached dwelling units and 78 overnight accommodation rooms/units with reductions to setbacks,
increases to building height to 100 feet for the overnight accommodation building tower and to 150
feet for the residential tower (to roof deck), a reduction to driveway spacing from 125 feet to 90
feet and a deviation to allow direct access to a arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project; and (3) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-05022) of four
dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-627 Bay Esplanade
and three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade.
On January 15, 2008, the CDB approved with 15 conditions Case Nos. FLD2007-
??
11034/TDR2005-05022 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217
overnight accommodation units; where 93 overnight accommodation units are permitted today); (2)
Flexible Development approval to permit 230 overnight accommodation units with reductions to
setbacks, an increase to building height to 100 feet (to roof deck) and to 150 feet (to roof deck) for
two portions of the building, a deviation to allow direct access to an arterial street and to allow a
two-year time frame to submit for a building permit, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project; and (3) Transfer of Development Rights of eight total dwelling units (being converted to
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 2 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
13 overnight accommodation units) previously approved and transferred under TDR2005-05022,
including four dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-627
Bay Esplanade and three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade.
The hotel was not reopened and was demolished on October 8, 2005, under BCP2005-09027. The western
submerged portion of the property is the Gulf of Mexico. The property is currently being used as a
temporary parking lot as approved by the City.
The 440 and 450 West attached dwelling condominiums towers are located to the south of this subject
property and are 157 feet in height (each tower). The properties directly east of this property are developed
with retail sales and services and restaurant uses. The City’s Beach Walk project has been constructed
transforming South Gulfview Boulevard to the north of this site into a winding beachside promenade with
lush landscaping, artistic touches and clear views to Clearwater's award-winning beach and the water
beyond. A City public parking lot is located to the north of this property.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to construct a new hotel building on the property consisting of 230 overnight
accommodation units. The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density has been determined to still be
valid, even though the hotel was demolished, due to the status of the approval of Case Nos. FLD2007-
11034/TDR2005-05022. The proposal includes amenities accessory to the hotel, such as meeting rooms,
spa, pool, restaurant and bar.
The proposed hotel building has a distinctive contemporary design that will make it an attractive landmark
at this location. From a bird’s eye view, the 150-foot tall, tower portion of the building will look like a
crescent or arc on top of the five-story parking, amenities and meeting room/ballroom base, providing a
stepped massing of the building. The building design provides all hotel units with water views and provides
easy access to for all guests to access the public beach and nearby businesses. The building’s shape is a
thin, tiered curve that acts as a focal point to the views from the adjacent beach and waterway. The curve
acts as a “hinge” element that links the Beach Walk District from the South Beach/Clearwater Pass
District. Development of the proposed hotel on this property will not impede the future redevelopment of
properties to the east. It is not anticipated that properties to the north (beach) and south (440 West
condominiums) will be redeveloped in the near future. Other than the basement parking level, the parking
garage is located in the southeastern portion of the building. An arrival lobby is provided on parking level
1. Level 1 is the main lobby level, along with hotel administrative offices, restaurant, bar, fitness center,
spa and parking level 2. Level 2 provides a junior ballroom of 1,370 square feet and meeting rooms. Level
3 provides a 9,600 square-foot ballroom. Levels 4 – 9 provide 23 hotel rooms on each floor. Level 10 is
indicated to have 22 hotel rooms, although there is no floor plan that shows such. Levels 11 – 12 provide
15 hotel rooms and a large concierge/amenity area (two stories in height) for meetings or parties. Levels 14
– 15 provide 14 hotel rooms for each floor, while Level 16 provides 12 hotel rooms. Single hotel rooms
will provide 437 square feet of floor area, while the suites are generally double the single size of room. The
proposed hotel consists of four rooftop levels – one being the top of the ballroom area at approximately 59
feet; the second being the southerly portion of the hotel tower adjacent to the 440 West condominium
building, having a maximum height of 100 feet; the third being just north of the second roof having a height
of approximately 140 feet; and the fourth being the hotel tower having a height of a maximum of 150 feet
to the flat roof deck. That portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is separated from the 440
West condominium building by 107.5 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design and the Transfer of
Development Rights minimum requirement of a 100-foot separation. The materials and color of the
building will support the streamline language of the architecture and its natural surroundings. The building
will be painted linen ruffle white, accented by alabaster. The window mullions, railing caps and decorative
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 3 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
grills will be arcadia silver. Balcony railings will be clear glass. The pool area is located at the
northwesterly portion of the site, adjacent to the beach, to minimize noise and visual distractions and
impacts to the 440 West condominiums to the south. With the height and location of the adjacent 440 West
condominiums, the proposed hotel design is compatible with the surrounding uses.
Parking for the hotel guests and employees is provided in a five-story, on-site parking garage containing
296 parking spaces at 1.286 parking spaces per hotel room, which will be 100 percent valet parked.
Parking levels above the basement level (Levels 2 – 5) are solely accessed by three hydraulic powered
vehicular elevators. No guests or other public will access the parking garage; only valet employees will
park and retrieve vehicles from the parking garage. The parking garage will include stacked or tandem
spaces, where another car must be moved to get the stacked or tandem car out, and will employ the
stacking of vehicles in drive aisles to create additional valet spaces when necessary, resulting in a total of
352 parking spaces in a worst case scenario (full occupancy and a large banquet).
The site is designed with three driveways on S. Gulfview Boulevard. The northern driveway will be an
entrance only, providing access to the porte cochere for the valet service, a middle, exit-only driveway for
guests and a southern driveway for service and delivery vehicles. The garage will be accessed by valet
drivers on the south side of the building.
The applicant is requesting a two-year development order due to market conditions. Section 4-407
specifies that an application for a building permit must be submitted within one year of the date the CDB
approves the project, unless otherwise specified under this approval.
Density: Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, the maximum density for properties with a
designation of Resort Facilities High is 50 overnight accommodation units per acre. Based on the 1.87
acres zoned Tourist District, a maximum of 93 overnight accommodation units are permissible under
current regulations. The former Adam’s Mark Hotel had 217 units, which was nonconforming to current
regulations. The applicant is requesting Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density to maintain
the same number of overnight accommodation units in a conforming manner (see discussion below). The
applicant previously transferred eight dwelling units under TDR2005-05022 from three locations on the
beach to this site and intends to convert these eight dwelling units to 13 overnight accommodation units
(1.67 conversion ratio) to permit the 230-room proposed hotel (see Transfer of Development Rights
discussion later in this Staff Report).
Termination of Status of Nonconformity: The development proposal includes a request for Termination of
Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight accommodation units; where 93 overnight
accommodation units are permitted today). The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density has been
determined to still be valid, even though the hotel was demolished, due to the status of the approval of Case
Nos. FLD2007-11034/TDR2005-05022. An important factor in this case is the ability to retain an
overnight accommodation use on the beach where many hotels/motels have been lost to condominium
(attached dwelling) construction. The criteria for Termination of Status of Nonconformity, as per Section
6-109 of the Community Development Code and outlined in the table below, including compliance with
perimeter buffer requirements, the provision of required landscaping for off-street parking lots and bringing
nonconforming signs, lighting and accessory uses/structures into compliance with the Code will be met with
this development proposal.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 4 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
1. Perimeter buffers conforming to the requirements of Section 3-1202.D of the N/A
Community Development Code shall be installed.
2. Off-street parking lots shall be improved to meet the landscaping standards X
established in Section 3-1202.E of the Community Development Code.
3. Any nonconforming sign, outdoor lighting or other accessory structure or accessory X
use located on the lot shall be terminated, removed or brought into conformity with
this development code.
4. The comprehensive landscaping and comprehensive sign programs may be used to X
satisfy the requirements of this section.
Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District. The
temporary parking lot will be removed upon construction of this proposal. All proposed parking will be
within a parking garage, where landscaping is not required. Any prior nonconforming signs, outdoor
lighting or other accessory structures/uses have already been removed when the Adam’s Mark Hotel was
demolished. A Comprehensive Landscape Program is not required for this proposal, as the proposed
landscaping meets Code requirements. Should the applicant desire attached or freestanding signage in
excess of minimum Code requirements, the Comprehensive Sign Program may be used for proposed
signage.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR): Pursuant to Section 4-1402 of the Community Development Code,
parcels governed by a special area plan, such as Beach by Design, may only receive density transfers from
parcels within the same special area plan. The Code does not limit the number of overnight
accommodation units that may be transferred to this site, as opposed to residential transfers that may not
exceed the otherwise applicable maximum density by more than 20 percent. However, for comparative
purposes, the maximum number of overnight accommodation units permitted today on this site is 93 units,
where a 20 percent transfer would be a maximum of 18 units. In this case, eight dwelling units were
previously transferred to this site and are being converted to 13 overnight accommodation units, which is
less than 20 percent of the maximum number of overnight accommodation units permitted today.
The applicant has previously transferred a total of eight dwelling units under TDR2005-05022, including
four dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-627 Bay Esplanade and
three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade. This proposal is recognizing this prior transfer.
Accordingly, the TDR has been found to be consistent with the requirements of Section 4-1402 and Section
4-1403 of the Community Development Code as outlined in the following table:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development of the parcel proposed for development will not reduce the fair X
market value of abutting properties;
2. The uses within the project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater; X
3. The uses or mix of uses within the project are compatible with adjacent land uses; X
4. The development of the parcel proposed for development will upgrade the immediate X
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and
5. The design of the proposed project creates a form and function that enhances the X
community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development
and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 5 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to Section 2-801.1 of the Community Development Code, the
maximum allowable I.S.R. is 0.95. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.914, which is consistent with the Code
provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the
minimum lot area for overnight accommodations is 20,000 square feet. The subject property is 81,450
square feet in area landward of the seawall (zoned Tourist District). Pursuant to the same Table, the
minimum lot width for overnight accommodations can range between 100 – 150 feet. The lot width of this
site along South Gulfview Boulevard is 236 feet. The proposal is consistent with these Code provisions.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the minimum front
setback for overnight accommodations can range between zero – 15 feet, the minimum side setback can
range between zero – 10 feet and the minimum rear setback can range between zero – 20 feet. This site
contains a Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) along the west and north sides of the property.
Section 3-905.A requires setbacks to be measured from the CCCL. The proposal includes a front (east)
setback of 2.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to building)
from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and to permit a sidewalk 10 feet seaward of the
CCCL, a side (south) setback of 16 feet (to building), 1.5 feet (to pavement) and zero feet (to privacy wall)
and a rear (west) setback of two feet (to building) from the CCCL and to permit concrete patios 13 feet
seaward of the CCCL.
The tower portion of the proposed building is set back 31.1 feet at its northeast corner from the front
property line along S. Gulfview Boulevard. Balconies beginning on the meeting room Level 2 are set back
25 feet to the front property line. The southeast corner of the building is set back approximately 42 feet
from the front property line. The support columns for the porte cochere at a distance of 2.5 feet to the front
property line and are the only building structure located within the front setback. The stairs leading to the
porte cochere from the sidewalk within the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way is also located within the
front setback. The pavement for the porte cochere is set back approximately 10 feet from the front
property line. The proposed building is set back 16 feet from the south property line. The pavement for
the drive on the south side of the building is setback 1.5 feet from the south property line. In response to
440 West condominium resident requests in order to mitigate negative views and noise from the loading
area, the applicant is proposing a six-foot high wall along a portion of the south property line. The CCCL
along the north property line is at an angle to and is not parallel with the north property line, being
narrower at the front property line and wider towards the seawall at the rear of the building. The proposed
setback to the side (north) setback to zero feet to the building is at the western portion of the building where
the CCCL cuts greatest into the property and is for the pool deck, stairs and handicap ramping. The pool
deck will be approximately 8.5 feet above the ground level. The tower will be set back 7.5 feet from the
north CCCL, with the balconies at 2.5 feet from the north CCCL, whereas the tower will be approximately
10 feet from the north property line at its closest point. The proposal includes a sidewalk adjacent to the
north property line from the east end of the handicap ramp to the sun terrace paver area on the western end
of the property seaward of the CCCL. On the west side of the property, stairs from the pool deck to the
sun terrace on the ground will be set back two feet from the CCCL, whereas the basement parking level and
pool deck will be primarily set back eight feet from the CCCL (except a 24-foot wide area close to the pool
at a five-foot setback to the CCCL). The proposed tower portion of the building is set back approximately
35 feet from the western CCCL. The proposal includes a sun terrace paver area on the western portion of
the property adjacent to the seawall seaward of the CCCL. The Building Code requires an 18-foot setback
from the seawall. Any approval of this application should be conditioned on the applicant receiving
approval from the State to have the both sun terrace paver area on the west side and the sidewalk along the
north side seaward of the CCCL. Additionally, any approval should be conditioned on the applicant
receiving a variance from the seawall setbacks according to the Building Code.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 6 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable height for overnight accommodation uses is 100 feet. Beach by Design permits buildings up to a
maximum of 150 feet through the use of Transfer of Development Rights, which this proposal employs.
The proposed hotel consists of four rooftop levels – one being the top of the ballroom area at
approximately 59 feet; the second being the southerly portion of the hotel tower adjacent to the 440 West
condominium building, having a maximum height of 100 feet; the third being just north of the second roof
having a height of approximately 140 feet; and the fourth being the hotel tower having a height of a
maximum of 150 feet to the flat roof deck. That portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is
separated from the 440 West condominium building by 107.5 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design and the
Transfer of Development Rights minimum requirement of a 100-foot separation. The applicant has
previously transferred eight dwelling units to this property from three other properties on the beach. Based
on a conversion factor of 1.67 (50 overnight accommodation units to 30 dwelling units), these eight
dwelling units convert to 13 overnight accommodation units. The proposed height of the lower and taller
portions of the tower is consistent and compatible with the heights of adjacent properties. There is a
reasonable relationship between the number of units being transferred to this site and the increase in height
above 100 feet. This site is located within the Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design, which is
indicated as a distinctive area of mixed use, including high-rise condominiums and resort hotels. The
applicant has submitted documentation indicating compliance with the Beach by Design criteria for no
more than two buildings more than 100 feet in height within 500 feet of each other. The proposal also
complies with the Code requirements under the definition of “Height, Building or Structure” for elevator
and stair overruns and mechanical rooms, which are permitted to extend a maximum of 16 feet above the
otherwise permitted height. Since both portions of the roof meet the maximum height limitations of the
Code and Beach by Design, the definition of “Height, Building or Structure” does not allow rooftop
occupancy by the public or guests. Approval of this request should be conditioned prohibiting such rooftop
use. The design of this project creates a form and function that will be consistent with and enhance the
character of this area.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the Community Development Code, the
minimum required parking is one parking space per unit, or 230 parking spaces. Parking for the hotel
guests and employees is provided in a five-story, on-site parking garage containing 296 parking spaces at
1.286 parking spaces per hotel room, which will be 100 percent valet parked. Parking levels above the
basement level (Levels 2 – 5) are solely accessed by three, 125 feet per minute, 7,000-pound hydraulic
powered vehicular elevators. Two of these elevators also access the ballroom level. The parking garage
will be adequately staffed to ensure all vehicles are efficiently parked without excess backup. The 296
parking spaces will be provided on the various parking levels as follows: Level 1 – 103 spaces; Level 2 –
41 spaces; Level 3 – 48 spaces; and Levels 4 – 5 – 52 spaces on each level. Of the 296 parking spaces
provided, 121 spaces are designed as stacked or tandem spaces where another car must be moved to get the
stacked or tandem car out. The submitted Parking Study demonstrates that stacking of vehicles in drive
aisles to create additional valet spaces when necessary will result in a total of 352 parking spaces in a worst
case scenario (full occupancy and a large banquet). The parking garage must comply with the Building
Code and have a vertical clear height for all parking garage levels of not less than seven feet including the
entrance and exit. This clear height includes any structural beams, fire sprinkler pipes and heads, electrical
conduits and lighting, drainage pipes and any other building elements.
The parking is designed to accommodate hotel guests and staff, as well as provide holding space for taxis
and airport shuttles awaiting fares. The site is designed with three driveways on S. Gulfview Boulevard.
The northern driveway will be an entrance only, providing access to the porte cochere. The porte cochere
drive will be one-way only travel (north to south), three lanes wide, be serviced by valet only and provide
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 7 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
stacking space for 21 vehicles. Guests departing will exit the property to S. Gulfview Boulevard using the
middle, exit-only driveway. The southern driveway is for service and delivery vehicles, separated so as to
not interfere with the valet operation in front of the hotel. Valet drivers will access the garage by an
internal drive between the middle and southern driveways and will access the porte cochere from the garage
by a garage exit at the northern driveway. The service drive on the south side of the hotel provides access
to two loading spaces, which are not required by Code, and the compactor dumpster. This service area will
prevent blocking traffic on South Gulfview Boulevard. The applicant will provide a 10-foot wide concrete
sidewalk along the site frontage of South Gulfview Boulevard with a shell finish, in accordance with Beach
Walk specifications.
Driveways for this proposal allow direct access to S. Gulfview Boulevard. The site has no other means of
street access except to S. Gulfview Boulevard, which is currently designated an arterial street in the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Access is much as the former Adam’s Mark Hotel
previously had. With Beach Walk construction, Coronado Drive will function as the main arterial street
between the roundabout and Hamden Drive, south of the subject property. This change of street
designation will be included in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to Section 3-201.D.1 of the Community Development Code, all outside
mechanical equipment shall be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting
properties. The proposed parking garage will have walls and screens concealing views of vehicles, where
fans may be necessary to effect air flow in the garage. Such fans will be indicated on the building plans
when submitted to comply with Building Code requirements. The applicant is proposing mechanical
equipment to be located on the roofs of the building or within enclosures meeting Code requirements for
maximum height above the flat roof. Based upon this, the development proposal is consistent with the
Code with regard to screening of outdoor mechanical equipment.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to Section 3-904.A of the Community Development Code, to minimize
hazards at driveway intersections with South Gulfview Boulevard, no structures or landscaping may be
installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade
within 20-foot sight visibility triangles. The site and landscape plans do not correctly indicate the sight
visibility triangles on the north and south sides of the northern driveway. Prior to the issuance of any
permits, the site and landscape plans need to be revised to correctly indicate such sight visibility triangles
and modify proposed improvements as necessary.
Pursuant to Section 3-904.B of the Community Development Code, to enhance views of the water from
waterfront property, no structures or landscaping may be installed (other than non-opaque fences not
exceeding 36-inches in height) within waterfront visibility triangles. The proposal indicates a waterfront
visibility triangle at the southwest corner of the seawall adjacent to the 440 West condominiums. but the
triangle is not drawn according to Code requirements. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant
will need to correctly show the waterfront visibility triangle on the site and landscape plans and comply
with the restrictions for such, including fence heights.
Utilities: Pursuant to Section 3-911 of the Community Development Code, for development that does not
involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines shall be installed underground
unless such undergrounding is not practicable. The civil site plan for this proposal indicates that all on-site
electric and communication lines will be placed underground in conformance with this Code requirement.
Landscaping: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D of the Community Development Code, there are no perimeter
buffers required in the Tourist District for this site. The landscape design incorporates plant material that
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 8 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
is native and salt tolerant, while providing visual interest. Medjool Date Palms are proposed along the
front of the site to provide height and scale to the building. The pedestrian scale along South Gulfview
Boulevard will be further enhanced through the use of accent shrubs and dense groundcover beds. The
eastern portion of the north side and the south and west sides of the building will be enhanced with
Cabbage Palms and other salt tolerant vegetation to create a landscape that will contribute to the overall
sense of place and be coordinated with Beach Walk improvements to provide a seamless feel between
properties. Due to the closeness of the building (pool deck, stairs and handicap ramping) to the north
property line and the sidewalk along the north property line form the end of the handicap ramp to the
western end of the property line, the applicant is only proposing hedges for landscaping within this western
portion of the north side. The pool deck is approximately 8.5 feet above ground elevation. Much like the
west side, Staff believes that palms and other accent trees can be planted within this area to help soften this
northern edge of the building, without compromising views by guests to the beach. Prior to the issuance of
any permits, the landscape plan should be revised to include trees within the landscaping area on this
western portion of the northern property line. The proposed on-site landscaping otherwise complies with
and exceeds Code requirements.
Vertical concrete curbing is required on-site to protect landscape materials and areas from vehicular
encroachment. The south edge of the southern service drive is not curbed. Prior to the issuance of any
permits, the civil plans should be amended to include such curbing.
The site plan proposes a six-foot high chain link fencing along south property line east and west of the solid
masonry wall. Pursuant to Section 3-805.B and the location of the building, there can be no chain link
fencing east of this wall. Staff believes a higher quality fence than chain is appropriate to provide a barrier
between the proposed hotel and the adjacent attached dwellings, such as a vinyl fence or vertical metal
grillwork (east or west of the solid masonry wall). The fencing type and height within the waterfront
visibility triangle must also meet the requirements of Sections 3-804.C and 3-904.B.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize hotel housekeeping staff to remove trash from units and transport
the trash to the trash compactor located on the south side of the property. A storage room for recyclables is
also provided adjacent to the loading area. Trash and recycling trucks will back into the service drive from
S. Gulfview Boulevard. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste
Department.
Signage: No freestanding or attached signage is proposed at this time for this overnight accommodation
use. Freestanding signage in the Tourist District is restricted to a maximum height of four feet, or six feet
through a Comprehensive Sign Program. Any approval of this application should include a condition
allowing for freestanding signage, where such future freestanding signage must be a monument-style sign
meeting Code requirements and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
Additional Beach by Design Guidelines: Section B.3 requires the floorplate of any building exceeding 45
feet in height be limited to a maximum of 25,000 square feet between 45 – 100 feet and a maximum of
10,000 square feet between 100 – 150 feet, but allows deviations to these floorplate requirements provided
the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maximum building envelop
allowance above 45 feet. The largest floorplate between 45 – 100 feet is approximately 13,879 square feet
and between 100 – 150 feet it is approximately 12,837 square feet. The applicant requests such deviation
to the floorplate restriction between 100 – 150 feet. The Design Guidelines provide that no more than 60
percent of the theoretical maximum building envelop located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. The
applicant has calculated the overall building mass between 45 – 150 feet at 21.8 percent, almost one-third
of the maximum permissible. This Staff Report has discussed the stepback of the crescent-shaped tower
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 9 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
and the thin nature of the tower reduces the overall mass and scale of the building, which Staff believes is
acceptable to justify the increased floorplates proposed.
Section C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that
no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length.
The proposed building footprint is approximately 38,000 square feet. The project’s overall horizontal
plane dimensions are approximately 212 feet along South Gulfview Boulevard and 300 feet along the north
side, while the vertical plane is approximately 160 feet from grade to the top of the tallest roof. None of
these dimensions are equal. Modulation of the building massing also provides considerable dimensional
variation.
Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an
offset of more than five feet. The tower portion of the building is crescent shaped, creating a continuously
curving façade and therefore, no plane is continuous for more than 30 feet. The waterside of the tower
façade is also modulated through the depth and framing methods of the balconies. There is a one-room
break in balconies along the north side, creating a pause or gap in the balconies on the façade. Other
balconies along the northwest and west sides between Floors 4 – 11 are framed with end walls to create a
different appearance. This break from balconies is widened on Floors 12 – 16, further tempering the
façade. Balconies are of different depths, which help interrupt the plane of the façade. Balconies on the
north side east of the one-room break and on Floors 12 – 16 on the northwest and west sides are five feet in
depth, while the balconies that are framed with walls on Floors 4 – 11 on the northwest and west sides are
8.5 feet in depth.
Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or architectural
decoration. The applicant has calculated that the north elevation is at 68 percent, the east elevation at 61
percent, the south elevation at 62 percent and the west elevation at 70 percent.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 10 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency
of the overnight accommodation use proposal with the standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803 of the
Community Development Code:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
1
Density 50 overnight accommodation units per 230 overnight X
acre (maximum of 93 units) accommodation units
(122.99 OVU/acre)
I.S.R. 0.95 0.914 X
Lot Area 20,000 sq. ft. 81,450 sq. ft. (upland area X
zoned T District; site also
has 25,954 sq. ft. of
submerged land zoned
OS/R District
Lot Width 100 feet 236 feet X
2
Setbacks Front: 0 – 15 feet 2.5 feet (to building) and X
zero feet (to pavement)
32
Side: 0 – 10 feet North: Zero feet (to X
building) from the CCCL;
and to permit a sidewalk
10 feet seaward of the
CCCL
2
South: 16 feet (to building), X
1.5 feet (to pavement) and
zero feet (to privacy wall)
32
Rear: 0 – 20 feet Two feet (to building) from X
the CCCL and to permit
concrete patios 13 feet
seaward of the CCCL
2
Height 35 – 100 feet 150 feet above Base Flood X
Elevation (BFE) to top of
4
roof deck
2
Off-Street One space per unit (230 spaces) 296 valet-only parking X
Parking spaces at 1.286 parking
spaces per hotel room
1
Per Termination of Status of Nonconformity, conversion calculations and Transfer of Development Rights under TDR2005-05022
2
See analysis in Staff Report
3
Setbacks are measured from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL)
4
Beach by Design
Increased height available pursuant to Transfer of Development Rights and guidelines
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 11 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-803.C of the Community Development
Code (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations X
from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the X
proposed development
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate
compliance with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;
or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of
a working waterfront use.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 12 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted
in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following
design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
??
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
??
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
??
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
??
Building stepbacks; and
??
Distinctive roofs forms.
??
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent
properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of September 4, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to
the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of
law:
Findings of Fact:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 13 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
1. The 2.45 total acres (1.87 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.58 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation
District) is located on the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard approximately 500 feet northwest of
Hamden Drive and directly south of Clearwater Beach;
2. On April 19, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved with 10 conditions Case Nos.
FLD2005-01005/SGN2005-01016 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density to
allow the continuation of an existing 217-room/unit hotel (where 74 rooms/units were permitted at that
time) and for height to allow the existing 155-foot high building (where a maximum height of 150 feet
is permitted today); (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 217-room/unit overnight
accommodation use with reductions to setbacks, an increase to building height to 155 feet (to existing
roof deck) and a reduction to required parking from 217 to 201 spaces (existing) as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project; (3) Reduction to the required interior landscape area, as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program; and (4) Comprehensive Sign Program approval (SGN2005-01016);
3. On August 16, 2005, the CDB approved with 18 conditions Case Nos. FLD2005-05047/TDR2005-
05022 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight accommodation
units existing to be converted to 104 dwelling units; where 56 dwelling units wee permitted at that
time); (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed use of 112 attached dwelling units and 78
overnight accommodation rooms/units with reductions to setbacks, increases to building height to 100
feet for the overnight accommodation building tower and to 150 feet for the residential tower (to roof
deck), a reduction to driveway spacing from 125 feet to 90 feet and a deviation to allow direct access to
a arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project; and (3) Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR2005-05022) of four dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit
from 625-627 Bay Esplanade and three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade;
4. On January 15, 2008, the CDB approved with 15 conditions Case Nos. FLD2007-11034/TDR2005-
05022 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight accommodation
units; where 93 overnight accommodation units are permitted today); (2) Flexible Development
approval to permit 230 overnight accommodation units with reductions to setbacks, an increase to
building height to 100 feet (to roof deck) and to 150 feet (to roof deck) for two portions of the building,
a deviation to allow direct access to an arterial street and to allow a two-year time frame to submit for
a building permit, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project; and (3) Transfer of Development
Rights of eight total dwelling units (being converted to 13 overnight accommodation units) previously
approved and transferred under TDR2005-05022, including four dwelling units from 557 and 579
Cyprus Avenue, one dwelling unit from 625-627 Bay Esplanade and three dwelling units from 667 Bay
Esplanade;
5. The hotel was not reopened and was demolished on October 8, 2005, under BCP2005-09027;
6. The property is currently being used as a temporary parking lot as approved by the City;
7. The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density has been determined to still be valid, even though
the hotel was demolished, due to the status of the approval of Case Nos. FLD2007-11034/TDR2005-
05022;
8. The proposal is to construct a new hotel building on the property consisting of 230 overnight
accommodation units;
9. The development proposal includes a request for Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density
(217 overnight accommodation units; where 93 overnight accommodation units are permitted today);
10. Eight dwelling units were previously transferred to this site under TDR2005-05022 and are being
converted to 13 overnight accommodation units for this project;
11. The proposal includes five floors of parking for a total of 296 parking spaces at a ratio of 1.286 spaces
per hotel room (where one space per room is required). Further stacking of vehicles in drive aisles
when necessary due to full occupancy and banquets can result in 352 parking spaces;
12. The proposal includes the following setbacks: a front (east) setback of 2.5 feet (to building) and zero
feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to building) from the Coastal Construction
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 14 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
Control Line (CCCL) and to permit a sidewalk 10 feet seaward of the CCCL, a side (south) setback of
16 feet (to building), 1.5 feet (to pavement) and zero feet (to privacy wall), a rear (west) setback of two
feet (to building) from the CCCL and to permit concrete patios 13 feet seaward of the CCCL;
13. The proposal includes a building height of 150 feet (to highest roof deck);
14. That portion of the building taller than 100 feet is separated from the 440 West condominium tower to
the south by approximately 107 feet, which is in compliance with the Beach by Design requirement to
have a minimum spacing of 100 feet between towers exceeding 100 feet in height;
15. The proposal includes a request for deviation to Beach by Design guidelines which require the
floorplate of any building exceeding 45 feet in height be limited to a maximum of 25,000 square feet
between 45 – 100 feet and a maximum of 10,000 square feet between 100 – 150 feet, as the largest
floorplate between 45 – 100 feet is approximately 13,879 square feet and between 100 – 150 feet is
approximately 12,837 square feet, but the guideline allows deviations to these floorplate requirements
provided the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maximum
building envelop allowance above 45 feet;
16. Beach by Design guidelines requires for buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet,
where the proposal is approximately 38,000 square feet, to be constructed so that no more than two of
the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The project’s
overall horizontal plane dimensions are approximately 212 feet along South Gulfview Boulevard and
300 feet along the north side, while the vertical plane is approximately 160 feet from grade to the top of
the tallest roof. None of these dimensions are equal;
17. Beach by Design guidelines requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than
100 feet without an offset of more than five feet. The tower portion of the building is crescent shaped,
creating a continuously curving façade and therefore, no plane is continuous for more than 30 feet.
The waterside of the tower façade is also modulated through the depth and framing methods of the
balconies;
18. Beach by Design guidelines requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or
architectural decoration. The applicant has calculated that the north elevation is at 68 percent, the east
elevation at 61 percent, the south elevation at 62 percent and the west elevation at 70 percent; and
19. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803 of the
Community Development Code;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-803.C of the
Community Development Code;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as
per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code; and
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the (1) Termination of
Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight accommodation units (as established by Cases
FLD2005-01005, FLD2005-05047 and FLD2007-11034); where 93 overnight accommodation units are
permitted today), under the provisions of Section 6-109; (2) Flexible Development application to permit a
230-room overnight accommodation use (hotel) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 81,450 square
feet/1.87 acres zoned Tourist District (2.45 total acres; 0.58 acres of total acreage zoned Open
Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 236 feet, a front (east) setback of 2.5 feet (to building) and zero
feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to building) from the Coastal Construction Control
Line (CCCL) and to permit a sidewalk 10 feet seaward of the CCCL, a side (south) setback of 16 feet (to
building), 1.5 feet (to pavement) and zero feet (to privacy wall), a rear (west) setback of two feet (to
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 15 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
building) from the CCCL and to permit concrete patios 13 feet seaward of the CCCL, a building height of
150 feet above Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to top of roof deck and 296 valet-only parking spaces at 1.286
parking spaces per hotel room, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Section 2-803.C, and three driveways where the two northernmost driveways are spaced 110 feet apart and
the two southernmost driveways are spaced 18 feet apart, where 125 feet is required by Section 3-102 and
approval of a two-year development order; and (3) including the Transfer of Development Rights of eight
total dwelling units (being converted to 13 overnight accommodation units) previously approved and
transferred under TDR2005-05022, including four dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Avenue, one
dwelling unit from 625-627 Bay Esplanade and three dwelling units from 667 Bay Esplanade, under the
provisions of Section 4-1402, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That application for a building permit to construct the approved project be submitted no later than
October 21, 2010, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to Section 4-407;
2. That the final design and color of the overnight accommodation building be consistent with the
conceptual elevations approved by the CDB;
3. That a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any
permits;
4. That there be no public/guest use of any roof 100 feet or higher;
5. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, Level 10 be designed with only 22 rooms, so that the
total number of rooms does not exceed 230 rooms;
6. That suites on all floors be designed to have only one door to the exterior hallway;
7. That prior to issuance of permits for any proposed structures north and west of the Coastal
Construction Control Line (CCCL), the applicant submit a copy of the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection approval for that construction north and west of the CCCL;
8. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks
or variances obtained prior to the issuance of any building permits;
9. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the vertical clear height of all the parking garage
levels be not less than 7 feet including entrance and exit (Florida Building Code 2004, Section
406.2.2);
10. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, site and landscape plans be revised to show the following:
a. pursuant to Section 3-904.B, comply with the dimensional requirements and restrictions for
waterfront visibility triangles;
b. pursuant to Section 3-805.B and the location of the building, revising the chain link fencing east of
the solid masonry wall along the south property line to a vinyl or vertical metal grillwork, as
acceptable to the Planning Department;
c. revise the chain link fencing west of the solid masonry wall to a vinyl or vertical metal grillwork, as
acceptable to the Planning Department, and the fencing type and height within the waterfront
visibility triangle must meet the requirements of Sections 3-804.C and 3-904.B;
d. pursuant to Section 3-904.A, correctly indicate such sight visibility triangles at the northern
driveway and modify landscaping to comply with such requirements;
e. pursuant to Section 3-1204.D, curb the south edge of the southern service drive with vertical
concrete curbing; and
f. palm and other accent trees planted in the landscape area along the western portion along the north
property line, in an amount and location acceptable to the Planning Department;
11. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign and be designed to match the exterior
materials and color of the building. The maximum height shall be four feet, unless approved at six feet
high through a Comprehensive Sign Program;
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 16 of 16
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08024 2008-10-21
12. That sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with compliance demonstrated
on plans acceptable to the Environmental Engineering Division, prior to the issuance of building
permits;
13. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits;
and
14. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
??
Aerial Map
??
Zoning Map
??
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
??
Photographs of Site and Vicinity
??
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Gulfview S 0430 New Hotel 2008 (T) - 10.21.08 CDB -
WW\Gulfview S 430 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08024/TDR2005-05022 – Page 17 of 16
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Members of the Community Development Board
FROM:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
DATE:
October 21, 2008
RE:
FLD2008-08024, 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard
After discussion with the applicant, Conditions of Approval #7 and #10f are revised as follows
(deleted language is strikethrough and added language is underlined):
Conditions of Approval:
1. That application for a building permit to construct the approved project be submitted no later
than October 21, 2010, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to Section 4-407;
2. That the final design and color of the overnight accommodation building be consistent with
the conceptual elevations approved by the CDB;
3. That a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of
any permits;
4. That there be no public/guest use of any roof 100 feet or higher;
5. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, Level 10 be designed with only 22 rooms,
so that the total number of rooms does not exceed 230 rooms;
6. That suites on all floors be designed to have only one door to the exterior hallway;
7. That prior to issuance of permits for any proposed structures north and west of the Coastal
Construction Control Line (CCCL), the applicant submit a copy of the appropriate State of
Florida agency Department of Environmental Protection approval for that construction north
and west of the CCCL;
8. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall
setbacks or variances obtained prior to the issuance of any building permits;
9. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the vertical clear height of all the parking
garage levels be not less than 7 feet including entrance and exit (Florida Building Code 2004,
Section 406.2.2);
10. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, site and landscape plans be revised to show the
following:
a. pursuant to Section 3-904.B, comply with the dimensional requirements and restrictions
for waterfront visibility triangles;
b. pursuant to Section 3-805.B and the location of the building, revising the chain link
fencing east of the solid masonry wall along the south property line to a vinyl or vertical
metal grillwork, as acceptable to the Planning Department;
c. revise the chain link fencing west of the solid masonry wall to a vinyl or vertical metal
grillwork, as acceptable to the Planning Department, and the fencing type and height
within the waterfront visibility triangle must meet the requirements of Sections 3-804.C
and 3-904.B;
d. pursuant to Section 3-904.A, correctly indicate such sight visibility triangles at the
northern driveway and modify landscaping to comply with such requirements;
e. pursuant to Section 3-1204.D, curb the south edge of the southern service drive with
vertical concrete curbing; and
f. palm and other accent trees planted in the landscape area along the western portion along
the north property line, in an amount and location acceptable to the Planning Department
Director;
11. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign and be designed to match the
exterior materials and color of the building. The maximum height shall be four feet, unless
approved at six feet high through a Comprehensive Sign Program;
FLD2008-08024 – Page 1 of 2
12. That sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with compliance
demonstrated on plans acceptable to the Environmental Engineering Division, prior to the
issuance of building permits;
13. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any
permits; and
14. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Gulfview S 0430 New Hotel 2008 (T) - 10.21.08
CDB - WW\Gulfview S 0430 - Memo - Amended Conditions of Approval 10.21.08.doc
FLD2008-08024 – Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case Number: FLD2008-08026
Agenda Item: E4
Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater
Representative: Michael Quillen, PE, City Engineering
Address: 210 Drew Street
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a marina for 127 slips in the
Downtown (D) District with a reduction to the side (north) setback from
135.7 to 19 feet, a reduction to the side (south) setback from 135.7 to
7.67 feet and an increase to the maximum width from 75% of the lot width
(1,017.7 feet) to 109.8% of the lot width (1,490 feet), under the provisions
of Sections 2-903.H, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603.
CURRENT ZONING: Downtown (D) and Preservation (P) Districts
CURRENT FUTURE LAND Central Business District (CBD) Category
USE CATEGORY:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Coachman Park; Parking lots; Water
Proposed Use: Marina for 127 slips
EXISTING North: Downtown District Overnight accommodations
SURROUNDING ZONING (Sandcastle Resort)
AND USES: South: Downtown District Attached dwellings (Pierce 100
Condos)
East: Downtown District Coachman Park, City Main Library,
Stein Mart, Waters Edge, City Hall
West: Preservation District Water (Clearwater Harbor)
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 23.96 acres is located along the Downtown Clearwater Harbor between Drew Street (north) and Pierce
Street (south). The overall site is currently developed with the Coachman Park, City Main Library,
Harborview Center, Stein Mart and City Hall. The proposed marina will utilize and make improvements to
those areas of the subject property adjacent to or in Clearwater Harbor. The site has approximately 1,357
feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor between the north and south property lines. There
currently exists a public fishing pier on the north side of the project that will remain and be expanded as
part of the marina. On the pilings of the old Memorial Causeway Bridge that was torn down, the City is
constructing a Promenade that will stretch into the water approximately 200 feet and be adjacent to the
dock in the North Basin. On March 13, 2007, Clearwater voters approved a referendum providing for the
construction of the proposed downtown boat slips for a maximum of 140 slips.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 1 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
The upland area of the waterfront being improved as part of this application currently includes a small
storage building on the north side at 210 Drew Street, two surface parking lots adjacent to the water (one
under the Memorial Causeway Bridge and one north of Cleveland Street) and on-street parking areas along
Drew and Cleveland Streets. Abutting on the north side of the subject property exists the Sandcastle
Resort on the north side of Drew Street between S. Ft. Harrison Avenue and the water. The Pierce 100
Condominiums abut on the south side of the south boat slip basin.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is for a municipal marina, where the primary users will be the boaters who lease dock space,
transient boaters visiting Clearwater, recreational boaters docking for events or activities in Coachman
Park or downtown and the general public visiting the waterfront area. The development proposal consists
of the construction of a marina consisting of a 127-slip, concrete floating dock system. A floating concrete
structure was chosen for this project as being the most aesthetically pleasing, easiest to maintain and
allowing the docks to rise and fall with the tides (greatly increasing their durability during storm events).
The docks are designed to maximize views of the waterfront at both the pedestrian and bluff levels. No
covered boatlifts, roof structures or vertical walls are proposed as part of this project. Due to FDOT
requirements, no permanent slips can be situated under the new Memorial Causeway Bridge, which
separates the marina into a North Basin and a South Basin. The North Basin will have 41 slips. The slips
will be accessed by boaters on the north side close to the existing public fishing pier and will include an
expanded public dock for fishing. Tenants and the public will access the dock in the North Basin adjacent
to the Promenade. The South Basin will have 86 slips and boaters will access the slips on the south end on
the west side of the Pierce 100 Condominiums. Tenants will access the dock at a point close to the north
end of the southern parking lot (under the new Memorial Causeway Bridge). Boat slip lengths will range
between 30 – 55 feet. The design of the docks in both the North and South Basins accommodates
maintenance vessels for the bridge and a minimum 30-foot clearance around the bridge support columns
and bases. The dock design in the North Basin also accommodates the Promenade, which is a separate
City project constructing a pier approximately 200 feet out into Clearwater Harbor on the pilings of the old
Memorial Causeway Bridge. On the outside (west side) of the docks in both the North and South Basins
adjacent to the channel, as well as the south side of the dock in the North Basin adjacent to the new
Memorial Causeway Bridge, the docks accommodate the transient side tie of boats up to 25 feet in width
and 100 feet in length or larger for persons traveling up and down the coast (staying for a few days or a
week) or for boaters attending events or activities in Coachman Park or the downtown. Boats moored at
these transient side ties will be sufficiently set back from the centerline of the channel of the Intracoastal
Waterway so as to not impact the safety or navigation of boats in the channel or at the side ties. The
outside (west side) of the docks, as well as the ends of docks, is designed as wave attenuators to reduce
wave impacts on boats moored in the slips. In the North Basin, the existing public fishing pier will be
extended to provide wave attenuation and be linked to the dock on the south side for the protection of sea
grasses adjacent to the seawall. The docks in the North Basin will also provide for a ferry landing,
although the exact location has not yet been determined. The ferry landing can provide a pre-arranged
place of loading or off-loading of customers boarding commercial boats or water taxis between the
mainland and the beach. Such allowance would allow commercial vessels where their base operation is
somewhere other than this marina to pick up or drop off customers lessening parking demands on
Clearwater Beach. Sea grasses in the South Basin will also be protected from boat encroachment by a
floating boat barrier between the seawall adjacent to the Pierce 100 Condominiums and Dock D, the
easternmost dock in the South Basin.
The proposal contains three primary components: (1) the floating docks and wave attenuators, (2) the
renovation and expansion of the existing building at the north end for a harbor master office and (3) upland
parking improvements including a drop-off area for boaters or persons accessing the ferry, enhanced
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 2 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
landscaping, sidewalks and public art. The docks and wave attenuators have been discussed above. The
existing building on the north end at Drew Street will be renovated and expanded toward the south to
provide for a harbor master’s office, as well as providing restrooms, showers and laundry facilities for
persons using the docks in the existing portion of the structure. The building will be made handicap
accessible. A new blue, standing seam metal roof will be added, including additional gables on the east and
west sides for visual interest. The building will be finished with gray cement plank or similar siding and
white trim. The upland improvements will upgrade existing conditions along the waterfront. Based on a
parking ratio of one parking space per two slips and 127 proposed slips, a total of 64 parking spaces are
required for this marina. There are two existing parking lots that will be upgraded to provide parking for
the marina. The northern parking lot is adjacent to the water just north of Cleveland Street and will provide
20 parking spaces. Interior landscape islands will be added, the edges of the pavement curbed, a new
sidewalk constructed adjacent to the seawall and the parking lot landscaped. The southern parking lot,
located under the new Memorial Causeway Bridge and adjacent to the water, is accessed from Pierce Street
and will provide 46 parking spaces. Interior landscaping will be added, primarily defining drive aisles
around the bridge support column, the edges of the pavement curbed, a new sidewalk constructed adjacent
to the seawall and the parking lot landscaped. Sidewalks along the seawall adjacent to these two parking
lots will be wider than normal and will be raised to act as wheel stops for vehicles. These two parking lots
combined provide the minimum parking required for the proposed marina. However, on-street parking
along Cleveland Street west of the driveway entrance to the Harborview Center/Stein Mart and along Drew
Street between Cleveland Street and the driveway to the Sandcastle Resort will be upgraded with bulb-out
landscape islands to define parking space rows. After the completion of the improvements, there will be a
total of 59 on-street parking spaces within the area of construction mentioned. Crosswalks to the parking
lot at the Harborview Center/Stein Mart and to Coachman Park will be constructed. The median at the
intersection of Cleveland and Drew Streets will be landscaped. Drop off areas will be constructed within
the streets at the end of Cleveland Street and at the harbor master building for persons accessing the ferry
or for dropping off gear and persons for the slips. Large paved areas adjacent to the proposed harbor
master building will be removed and landscaped. A new trash enclosure will be constructed adjacent to the
harbor master building. The areas along Cleveland and Drew Streets will be landscaped, as well as new
lighting installed. Fire hydrants and fire risers will be installed for fire protection purposes for boats
moored at the docks.
A marina is subject to the relevant review criteria of Sections 2-903.H, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603. The
proposed marina is not located in any of the areas of environmental significance listed in the criteria, with
the exception of its proximity to Clearwater Harbor grass beds. Sea grass beds were mapped prior to the
dock design phase. The proposed docks in both the North and South Basins have been located in a manner
to avoid any sea grasses. There are no residentially zoned properties adjacent to the proposed dock
(adjacent properties are zoned Downtown District). No commercial activities will be permitted in the
leased slips. Living aboard non-transient vessels will be prohibited. Private tenants (those who lease slips)
may be permitted to stay aboard a total of eight nights a month, so that they may enjoy the benefit of using
their vessel during select weekends or when in conjunction with a family vacation or holiday. Transient
guests (those that travel from marina to marina much like those that travel in a recreational vehicle from
RV park to RV park) will be permitted to stay aboard their vessels while visiting Clearwater (an average
stay of three days at the Beach Marina). There will be no fueling facilities, boat launching or dry storage
of boats at this marina. Sewage pump-out facilities are proposed in both the North and South Basins, but
such facilities will be a vacuum system linked to the upland sewer system so that there will be no holding
tanks located over water. The proposed harbor master building on the north side complies with the
Downtown Design Guidelines.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 3 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
Other than the small dock for the Pierce 100 Condominium, there are no other docks in close proximity to
the proposed project. The proposal has been sensitively designed at an appropriate scale, character and
intensity to complement neighborhood residential, commercial and recreational uses proximate to the site.
This municipal marina, as approved by the voters in 2007, is envisioned as another catalytic project
contributing to the redevelopment of the downtown. The upscale design of the docks and the proposed
parking, roadway, public art and landscaping will ensure the project is in harmony with the neighborhood.
Since there are no other docks in close proximity (other than the small dock for the Pierce 100
Condominiums), there is no established dock pattern to be compatible with and there are no other marinas
in close proximity. The proposed dock has been designed to be sufficiently set back from the centerline of
the channel of the Intracoastal Waterway to not have any detrimental effects on the use of the adjacent
waters for navigation, while still allowing for the side tie of vessels on the outside of the wave attenuators,
as established by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The channel is well marked and a slow speed
minimum wake zone is in place between Pierce 100 and the Seminole Boat Launch Ramp to maximize
boater safety. Access to the docks is limited to three points to also maximize boater safety. Existing sea
grasses are currently unprotected from boaters entering the area. The proposal will restrict access to these
sea grass beds, thereby protecting them from boaters through the pedestrian dock paralleling the seawall in
the North Basin and a floating boat barrier in the South Basin. While manatees frequent the area, it is not
expected that the addition of the marina will increase the threat to manatees. A manatee protection plan
will be required as part of the State and/or Federal permitting process. The proposed marina will not
adversely impact marine resources found along the seawall and underneath the public fishing dock. Water
depths beneath the proposed boat slips range from approximately five feet to approximately 16 feet. The
water depth under Dock D in the South Basin is the shallowest at 4.9 feet at mean low tide, which provides
more than the one-foot clearance distance between the bottom of the vessel and the bottom of the water
body at mean low tide. These slips in Dock D have been designed to accommodate the smallest vessels
with the least draft, which is sufficient to not adversely impact bottomlands. The docks as designed will
not cause erosion to bottomlands by vessels utilizing this facility. The City will be seeking a Florida Clean
Marina designation, which is voluntary non-regulated program designation for the facility that
acknowledges and rewards environmentally conscious marina facilities. There will be no material adverse
impact on wildlife, marine life and other natural resources. There are no beaches proximate to the site and
additional protection to the existing seawalls is anticipated as part of the project design. The layout of the
slips, docks and pedestrian walkways, coupled with the proposed Clean Marina designation and
compliance with County, State and Federal permitting requirements, serve to ensure the proposed facility
will not have adverse impacts on the habitats listed in Section 3-601.C.3.f.ii. There are no upland habitats
of significance impacted by the project.
Servicing of boats will be limited to routine maintenance and minor repairs necessary for the preservation
and seaworthiness of the vessel that respect boats moored in other slips, much as is permitted at the Beach
Marina, and will be monitored by the Harbor Master staff. Such routine maintenance and minor repairs
include, but may not be limited to, mechanical adjustment, minor painting, leak seals and rot prevention.
Major repairs would require the boat to be brought to appropriate off-site repair facilities. Servicing of
boats allowed at this facility will be limited to the hours between 6:00 am to 9:00 pm. The City’s Harbor
Master has determined the proposed marina will pose no hazard or obstruction to navigation. Trash
receptacles are being provided on the upland at both the North and South Basins to allow boaters to dispose
of trash when leaving their vessels. Trash from these receptacles will be placed by City personnel in the
trash dumpster proposed to be located next to the harbor master building on the north end. In the event of a
spill, the City has a containment process utilizing absorbent booms and pads to contain the spills.
Requirements of the Pinellas County Inland Navigation Control Authority, Florida Department of
Environmental Protection and the US Army Corps of Engineers are more stringent than City regulations
and these docks are subject to these more stringent regulations.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 4 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
The marina project represents an appropriate addition to the waterfront and complements the downtown
redevelopment plan and neighboring properties. The scale and coverage of the proposed marina is
appropriate for this location, as it has been designed to fit into the existing basin. The marina will not
hinder or discourage the appropriate development/redevelopment of adjacent properties. Moreover, the
Harborview Center and Coachman Park will likely be redeveloped and improved as part of the City’s
ongoing downtown and waterfront redevelopment efforts. The marina is a key component of this
redevelopment effort and will enhance recreational and pedestrian opportunities along the waterfront for
permanent residents and tourists visiting the area. The boat slips and upland improvements will improve
safety aspects along the waterfront. On-street parking areas will be enhanced with landscaping, as well as
two off-street parking lots, and sidewalk and crosswalk improvements will significantly upgrade traffic
circulation for vehicles as well as pedestrians. The community character of the area will be clearly
enhanced through this waterfront improvement project. The marina will be staffed 24 hours a day, seven
days a week and the marina will be monitored by a security camera system. Staffing will consist of a dock
master office staff manned by a Marine Department personnel worker from 6:30 am to 9:00 pm, and a
Police Aide Security Guard from 9:00 pm to 6:30 am.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS:
With regards to setbacks, the dimensional standards criteria set
forth in Section 3-601.C.3.h of the Community Development Code state that docks shall be located no
closer to any property line as extended into the water than the distance equivalent to ten percent of the
width of the waterfront property line. The width of the waterfront property line is 1,357 feet; therefore the
proposed dock must be set back from the east and west property lines a minimum of 135.7 feet. The
proposal includes a deviation to reduce the setback of the docks in both the North and South Basins below
that required. The existing public fishing dock is set back from the extended north property line 19 feet. A
wave attenuator extension to the west of the existing dock, which also provides access to the expanded
public fishing pier to the south protecting the sea grasses adjacent to the seawall, will be set back
approximately 66 feet. The closest portion of the proposed dock that will have boat slips is approximately
200 feet from the extended north property line, exceeding the minimum setback of 135.7 feet. There is no
existing dock at the Sandcastle Resort north of this existing public fishing dock. There will be no
navigation issues with the docks in the North Basin in regard to adjacent property. The Dock A in the
South Basin is proposed at a minimum setback of 7.67 feet to the extended south property line (adjacent to
the Pierce 100 Condominiums). Other portions of the proposed dock in the South Basin are setback from
the seawall along the south property line much greater, but still less than the required setback (Dock B –
81.67 feet; Dock C – 84.5 feet; and Dock D – 68 feet). The Pierce 100 Condominium property juts out
into the water, helping to form the South Basin. There is an existing, relatively small dock for the Pierce
100 Condominium located close to the southern portion of the west side of the property, providing slips
oriented north/south. The design of the docks in the South Basin has attempted to minimize wave action
into the marina for the protection of the moored boats, which represents a primary need for a setback
reduction from the south property line extended. There are no navigation issues with the proposed docks in
the South Basin in regard to the adjacent property.
With regards to length, the dimensional standards criteria set forth in Section 3-601.C.3.h of the
Community Development Code state that commercial docks shall not extend from the mean high water line
or seawall of the subject property more than 75 percent of the width of the subject property as measured
along the waterfront property line; thus the length of the dock cannot exceed 1,017.75 feet. As proposed,
the dock has a maximum length of 685 feet from the southeast corner of the east seawall to the western
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 5 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
edge of the proposed dock in the South Basin. This dimension diminishes as it moves to the southwest in
the South Basin and diminishes as it moves northward through the North Basin. The proposal is less than
and therefore meets the maximum allowable length of the docks. The same threshold in Section 3-
601.C.3.h that applies to length also applies to width; therefore the width of the proposed dock cannot
exceed 1,017.75 feet. The dock has a proposed width of 1,490 feet, measured from the northern edge of
the existing public fishing pier in the North Basin to the southern edge of the dock in the South Basin. The
proposal includes a deviation to increase the dock width from the maximum 75 percent to 109.8 percent of
the lot width. This 1,490-foot dimension includes approximately a 55-foot distance of blank area on the
north side due to the angle of the western edge of the proposed dock with the northern edge of the existing
public fishing pier, approximately a 230-foot distance between the docks in the North and South Basins
where the new Memorial Causeway Bridge is located and approximately 115 feet between the wave
attenuator extension to the public fishing dock on the north side and the northern edge of the proposed dock
providing for water access to the docks in the North Basin. When these other distances are taken into
account, the width is 1,090 feet (representing a modest increase of approximately 72 feet, given the size of
the property).
The following table depicts the development proposals consistency with the standards and criteria as per
Section 3-601.C.3.h of the Community Development Code:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
1
Setbacks 10% of the width of the subject North: 19 feet (to existing dock) X
1
(Minimum) property (135.7 feet) South: 7.67 feet X
1
Length 75% of the width of the subject 687 feet maximum from seawall X
(Maximum) property (1,017.75 feet)
1
Width 75% of the width of the subject 1,490 feet X
(Maximum) property (1,017.75 feet)
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the
development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-903.H of the Community Development
Code (Marinas):
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. The parcel proposed for development is not located in areas identified in the X
Comprehensive Plan as areas of environmental significance including:
a. The north end of Clearwater Beach;
b. Clearwater Harbor grass beds;
c. Cooper's Point;
d. Clearwater Harbor spoil islands;
e. Sand Key Park;
f. The southern edge of Alligator Lake.
1
2. No commercial activities other than the mooring of boats on a rental basis shall be X
permitted on any parcel of land which is contiguous to a parcel of land which is
designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas, unless the marina facilities are totally
screened from view from the contiguous land which is designated as residential and
the hours of operation of the commercial activities are limited to the time period
between sunrise and sunset.
1
3. The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines X
in Division 5 of Article 3.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 6 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
1
4. All marina facilities shall comply with the commercial dock requirements set forth X
in Section 3-601.C.3 and the marina and marina facilities requirements set forth in
Section 3-603.
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency.
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL DOCKS (SECTION 3-
601.C.3.a-g):
The development proposal has been found to be consistent with the criteria for commercial
docks. Specific responses to each of these criteria have been provided by the applicant and are included
with their application. The individual criteria for commercial docks are set forth in the following table:
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to the comfort, X
convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the principal use of the
property.
1
2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of adjacent X
properties and the neighborhood in general.
1
3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the general vicinity. X
1
4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of the proposed dock X
shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently
using the adjacent waterways for recreational and/or commercial uses.
Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent
waterway by uses including but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized
boats.
1
5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock shall not have X
a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navigation, transportation,
recreational or other public conveniences.
1
6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to marine X
grassbeds or other aquatic resources in the surrounding areas.
1
7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, grass flats X
suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil
suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds
for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which
has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be
approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity;
oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries
or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as juvenile fish habitat.
1
8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other area X
associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation and existing water depths to
ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest
member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at
mean or ordinary low water (-0.95 NGVD datum).
1
9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm drainage, shoaling X
of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or
limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area
in which the dock is proposed to be located.
1
10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the conservation of X
wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so
as to be contrary to the public interest.
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 7 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
1
11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; vegetative, X
terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one
or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or
feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which
would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated
preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan,
national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other designated
preservation areas, and bird sanctuaries.
1
12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands. The dock shall not have a material X
adverse affect upon the uplands surrounding.
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency.
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR MARINAS AND MARINA
FACILITIES (SECTION 3-603):
The development proposal has been found to be consistent with the
criteria for marinas and marina facilities. Specific responses to each of these criteria have been provided
by the applicant and are included with their application. The individual criteria for commercial docks are
set forth in the following table:
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. All proposed activities including, but not limited to, fueling, pumping-out, X
chartering, living-aboard, launching, dry storage and the servicing of boats, motors
and related marine equipment shall require approval in accordance with the
provisions of the zoning district in which the marina or marina facility is proposed
to be located.
1
2. For marina facilities located adjacent to residential districts, no fueling or launching X
facilities shall be located within 20 feet of the residential property line, and no
fueling or servicing of boats shall occur at such marinas after 9:00 p.m. or before
6:00 a.m.
3. No fuel storage facility or sanitary pump-out station holding tank shall be located X
over water.
1
4. The marina shall pose no hazard or obstruction to navigation, as determined by the X
city harbormaster.
1
5. The marina shall not adversely affect the environment, including both onshore and X
offshore natural resources.
1
6. Adequate sanitary facilities shall be provided landside and a sanitary pump-out X
station shall be provided and shall be available to marina users 24 hours a day.
1
7. A manatee protection plan shall be provided and appropriate speed zone signs shall X
be posted to control boat speed for manatee protection.
1
8. Adequate spill containment areas shall be provided on the property. X
1
9. Design of the marina shall maintain existing tidal flushing and aquatic circulation X
patterns.
1
10. In the event of conflict between these standards and federal or state law or rules, X
the federal or state law or rules shall apply to the extent that these standards have
been preempted; otherwise, the more stringent regulations shall apply.
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency.
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per Section 3-913.A of the Community Development Code:
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 8 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
Consistent Inconsistent
1
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
1
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
1
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
1
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
1
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
1
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent
properties.
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of September 4, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to
the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of
law:
Findings of Fact:
1. That the 23.96 acres is located along the Downtown Clearwater Harbor between Drew Street (north)
and Pierce Street (south). The overall site is currently developed with the Coachman Park, City Main
Library, Harborview Center, Stein Mart and City Hall. The proposed marina will utilize and make
improvements to those areas of the subject property adjacent to or in Clearwater Harbor;
2. That there currently exists a public fishing pier on the north side of the project that will remain and be
expanded as part of the marina;
3. That on March 13, 2007, Clearwater voters approved a referendum providing for the construction of
the proposed downtown boat slips for a maximum of 140 slips;
4. That the site has approximately 1,357 feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor between the
north and south property lines;
5. That the development proposal consists of the construction of a municipal marina consisting of a 127-
slip concrete floating dock system, with 41 slips in the North Basin and 86 slips in the South Basin;
6. That the design of the docks in both the North and South Basins accommodates maintenance vessels
for the bridge and a minimum 30-foot clearance around the bridge support columns and bases;
7. That on the outside (west side) of the docks in both the North and South Basins adjacent to the channel,
as well as the south side of the dock in the North Basin adjacent to the new Memorial Causeway
Bridge, the docks accommodate the transient side tie of boats up to 25 feet in width and 100 feet in
length or larger for persons traveling up and down the coast (staying for a few days or a week) or for
boaters attending events or activities in Coachman Park or the downtown;
8. That boats moored at these transient side ties will be sufficiently set back from the centerline of the
channel of the Intracoastal Waterway so as to not impact the safety or navigation of boats in the
channel or at the side ties;
9. That the outside (west side) of the docks, as well as the ends of docks, is designed as wave attenuators
to reduce wave impacts on boats moored in the slips;
10. That the existing building on the north end at Drew Street will be renovated and expanded toward the
south to provide for a harbor master’s office, as well as providing restrooms, showers and laundry
facilities for persons using the docks in the existing portion of the structure;
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 9 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
11. That based on a parking ratio of one parking space per two slips and 127 proposed slips, a total of 64
parking spaces are required for this marina;
12. That two existing parking lots that will be upgraded to provide parking for the marina. The northern
parking lot will have 20 parking spaces, while the southern parking lot will have 46 parking spaces.
An additional 59 on-street parking spaces along Cleveland Street and Drew Street proximate to the
marina will also be upgraded as part of this project;
13. That there are no properties zoned residentially adjacent to the proposed dock (adjacent properties are
zoned Downtown District);
14. That the proposed dock meets the required length criteria of the Code;
15. That the proposal includes a deviation to reduce the side (north) setback from 135.7 to 19 feet and to
reduce the side (south) setback from 135.7 to 7.67 feet;
16. That the proposal includes a deviation to increase the maximum width from 75% of the lot width
(1,017.7 feet) to 109.8% of the lot width (1,490 feet);
17. That water depths beneath the proposed boat slips range from approximately five feet to approximately
16 feet, providing more than the one-foot clearance distance between the bottom of the vessel and the
bottom of the water body at mean low tide; and
18. That there are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
1. That on March 13, 2007, Clearwater voters approved a referendum providing for the construction of
the proposed downtown boat slips for a maximum of 140 slips;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-903.H of the
Community Development Code (Marinas);
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the commercial dock review criteria as per Section 3-
601.C.3 of the Community Development Code;
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the marina review criteria as per Section 3-603 of the
Community Development Code; and
5. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Applicability criteria as per Section 3-
913.A of the Community Development Code.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the Flexible Development
application to permit a marina for 127 slips in the Downtown (D) District with a reduction to the side
(north) setback from 135.7 to 19 feet, a reduction to the side (south) setback from 135.7 to 7.67 feet and an
increase to the maximum width from 75% of the lot width (1,017.7 feet) to 109.8% of the lot width (1,490
feet), under the provisions of Sections 2-903.H, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That living aboard non-transient vessels be prohibited, except as may be allowed for private tenants
under the Private Docking Permit;
2. That there be no fueling facilities at this marina;
3. That no private tenants conduct any commercial business from any slip at this marina;
4. That ferry service may be permitted, with written prior permission from the City Manager or designee,
to allow commercial vessels with a base operation in another location other than this marina to pick up
and/or drop off customers at this marina;
5. That major servicing of vessels be prohibited, but permissible servicing of vessels be limited to routine
maintenance and minor repairs necessary for the preservation and seaworthiness of the vessel, as
determined by the Harbor Master;
6. That signage be permanently installed on the docks or at the entrance to the docks containing wording
warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity;
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 10 of 10
EXHIBIT FLD2008-08026 2008-10-21
7. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit and Corps of Engineer's Permit, if applicable, be
submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and
8. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, compliance with all requirements of General Engineering,
Traffic Engineering and Stormwater Engineering be met; and
9. That the Public Art and Design Impact Fee be due on this project, pending transfer of impact fee funds.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
* Location Map * Aerial Map * Zoning Map
* Existing Surrounding Uses Map * Photographs of Site and Vicinity
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Drew 0210 City Downtown Boat Docks.Marina (D) - 10.21.08
CDB - WW\Drew 0210 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – October 21, 2008
FLD2008-08026 – Page 11 of 10
EXHIBIT CPA2008-09003 2008-10-21
CDB Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Case #: CPA2008-09003
Ordinance #: 8016-08
Agenda Item: F-2
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
REQUEST: Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments
INITIATED BY: City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
This item involves an amendment to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan to update the
Capital Improvements Element related to the City’s current FY08/09 Capital
Improvement Program Budget pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 163.3177(3)(b) 1.,
and Florida Administrative Code section 9J-5.011.
The fundamental purpose of a Capital Improvements Element is to ensure that the
community is able to fund the public facilities supported in the Comprehensive Plan
Elements in alignment with the community’s (minimum five-year) schedule of the
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. The statutory requirements call for each
local government to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan which make
corrections and modifications pursuant to the annual update to the Capital Improvement
Program budget. These amendments are due by December 1 and are exempt from the
twice a year limitation for large-scale amendments and require only one public hearing
prior to transmitting it to the State Department of Community Affairs.
As required by Florida Statutes 163.3177(2), this amendment package also includes the
annual update to the Capital Improvements Element regarding the reference in Policy
32.7.6 to the School District’s Five-Year Work Program of FY2008/09 through 2012/13
as adopted by the School Board on September 9, 2008.
ANALYSIS:
Three amendments are proposed to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan in
Ordinance No. 8016-08 as follows:
Amendments – CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: (pages are given from
Comprehensive Plan):
The following are corrections and modifications that are being made:
1
Page -
CPA2008-03002
EXHIBIT CPA2008-09003 2008-10-21
??
Capital Improvements Summary (page I-1): Deleted previous eight examples of
CIP projects from FY1999/00 budget and updated with examples of five CIP
projects for FY2008/09 through FY2013/14 (six-year CIP program as adopted by
Ordinance No. 8006-08 on September 18, 2008).
??
Policy 32.1.2 (page I-2), modified to add the City’s six-year Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) schedule to the element as “Schedule I-A”.
??
Policy 32.7.6 (page I-10), relative to the updated School District’s Five-Year
Work Program, is updated to “FY 2008/09 through FY 2012/13”, as approved by
the School Board on “September 9, 2008”.
STANDARDS FOR REVIEW
Pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-603(F) no amendment to the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan shall be approved unless it complies with the following
standards:
1. The amendments will further implementation of the comprehensive plan
consistent with the goals, policies and objectives contained in the plan.
The proposed amendments to the Capital Improvements Element of the Clearwater
Comprehensive Plan are consistent with and will further the implementation of the
goals, objectives, and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan elements
associated with updated public facilities capital projects pursuant to the FY2008/09
through FY2013/14 Capital Improvement Program Budget.
2. The amendments are not inconsistent with other provisions of the comprehensive
plan.
The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan. It updates the City’s CIP six-year projects that are supported in other elements
of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The available uses, if applicable, to which the property may be put are appropriate
to the property in questions and compatible with existing and planned uses in the
area.
The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a
specific property.
4. Sufficient public facilities are available to serve the property.
The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a
specific property.
2
Page -
CPA2008-03002
EXHIBIT CPA2008-09003 2008-10-21
5. The amendments will not adversely affect the natural environment.
The proposed amendments seek to provide consistent and coordinated efforts
pursuant to the City’s CIP projects as identified within all the elements of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. No projects adversely affect the natural environment, while
some projects positively affect it. The latter includes CIP Project #96170 - Coastal
Basin Projects and CIP Project #96739 – Reclaimed Water Distribution System.
6. The amendments will not adversely impact the use of property in the immediate
area.
The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a
specific property.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
:
The proposed text amendments meet state statutes and rules by making corrections and
modifications in the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Capital Improvements Element.
These amendments are made pursuant to the City of Clearwater’s FY2008/09 through
FY2013/14 Capital Improvement Program Budget (adopted on September 18, 2008) and
the Pinellas County School District’s Five-Year Work Program FY2008/09 through
2012/13 (adopted by the School Board on September 9, 2008).
APPROVAL
The Planning Department recommends of Ordinance No. 8016-08 that
amends the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff:
Sandra E. Herman
Planner III
ATTACHMENT:
Ordinance No. 8016-08
3
Page -
CPA2008-03002
,
.,
~ Clearvvater
GOI:'7g Green with less
----~ -~
()
TO:
Community Development Board Members
FROM:
Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Agenda Items for October 21, 2008
October 16,2008
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting September 16, 2008
Site investigation and packet listing
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1 - 2):
1. Case: FLD2008-05012 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
.Aes no
2./se: REZ2008-07007 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Yes no
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1-4):
1. ~e: FLD2008-05013 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2008-00001)
Yes no
2. / Case: FLD2008-08025 - 1160 Mandalay Point Road
Yes no
3. Case: FLD2008-08024 - 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard
1Yes no
4. /Case: FLD2008-08026 - 210 Drew Street
_ Yes no
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2008\10 October 21.2008\1 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc
I"
f
THREE APPLICA nONS (Items 1-2)
1. ~ DV A2008-0000 1 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2008-050 13)
~-e-s-' No
2. Case: CP A2008-09003
Date:
cJc~W~/, 2-00<21
I
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2008110 October 21, 2008\1 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc
<"
.
~ Clearvvater
(~~=--=-----.:.:-- ~:
GOh19 Green Ivith less
TO:
Community Development Board Members
FROM:
Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Agenda Items for October 21, 2008
October 16,2008
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting September 16,2008
Site investigation and packet listing
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1 - 2):
1.; Case: FLD2008-05012 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Yes no
2. JCase: REZ2008-07007 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
v' Yes no
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1-4):
1. ) Case: FLD2008-050 13 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2008-0000 1)
V Yes no
~a::: FLD anda]ay~;:~a~ ~ ~
3. Case: FLD2008-08024 - 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard
~Yes no
4.
...{:ase: FLD2008-08026 - 210 Drew Street
V Yes no
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2008\10 October 21,200811 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc
.~"
,
THREE APPLICATIONS (Items 1-2)
1. lase: DV A2008-00001 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2008-0S013)
V''Yes No
2. Case: CP A2008-09003
Signature:
Date: /1) -/~ -0 /'
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2008110 October 21,200811 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc
r
...
~ Clear\Vater
GOk1g Green with less
-----.:::--------.::::::::::
~~----
u
TO:
Community Development Board Members
FROM:
Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Agenda Items for October 21, 2008
October 16, 2008
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting September 16, 2008
Site investigation and packet listing
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1- 2):
1. .. y'se: FLD2008-050l2 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
t/ Yes no
2. C!J.se: REZ2008-07007 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
/
t/ Yes
no
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1-4):
1. /tase: FLD2008-050l3 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2008-0000l)
V Yes no
2.
Case: FLD2008-0~5 - 1160 Mandalay Point Road .
Yes V no - G-.4-'r~()- ND A-ccl.S,S
3.
Case: FLD2008-08024 - 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard
Yes
no
4. fiase: FLD2008-08026 - 210 Drew Street
V' Yes no
S:IPlanning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2008110 October 21,2008\1 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc
THREE APPLICATIONS (Items 1-2)
/'
1. / Case: DV A2008-0000 1 - 100 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2008-050 13)
V Yes No
2. Case: CP A2008-09003
Signature:
~"-
--'~.~--.
_ Date: /0 ///9 I~R--'
, I
/::'.lu4-1'l-1'--. L
PRINT NAME
o m..-.-t s.-
--
S:IPlanning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB\2008110 October 21,2008\1 Cover MM 10.21.2008.doc