FLD2009-01001 - 431 Mandalay Ave - Way Cool Grill - March 17, 2009FLD2009-01001
431 MANDALAY AVE
WAY COOL GRILL
PLANNER OF RECORD: WW
ATLAS # 267A
ZONING: T
LAND USE: RFH
RECEIVED : 01/02/2009
INCOMPLETE:
COMPLETE:
MAPS:
PHOTOS:
STAFF REPORT:
DRC :
CDB:
CLW CoverSheet
CDB Meeting Date: March 17, 2009
Case Numbers: FLD2009-01001
Agenda Item: DD3.
Owners/Applicants: C. John Re, Peter Pullara and Joseph A. Pullara
Representative: Robert E. Gregg
Address: 431 Mandalay Avenue
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a restaurant with an accessory
sidewalk Cafe in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 5,400 square
feet, a lot width of 50 feet, a front (west) setback of zero feet (to existing
building), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing/proposed
building), a side (south) setback of 5.4 feet (to proposed building) and
zero feet (to existing sidewalk), a rear (east) setback of 2.25 feet (to
proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk), a building
height of 14.67 feet (to flat roof) and zero parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C; and a reduction
to the foundation landscaping along Mandalay Avenue from five to zero
feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of
CDC Section 3-1202.G.
CURREN'T' ZONING: Tourist (T) District
CURRENT FUTURE LAND Resort Facilities High (RFH)
USE CATEGORY:
BEACH BY DESIGN Retail and Restaurant District
CHARACTER DISTRICT:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Retail Sales
Proposed Use: Restaurant v
EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District
SURROUNDING ZONING South: Tourist (T) District
AND USES: East: Tourist (T) District
West: Tourist (T) District
vith an accessory sidewalk cafe
Restaurant
City Parking Lot and Retail Sales
Retail Sales
Overnight accommodations (Hilton)
ANAL ,PSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.12 acres is located on the east side of Mandalay Avenue, approximately 50 feet south of Papaya
Street. The site, until recently, has operated as a retail sales and services establishment. On July 25,
2008, a Development Order with four conditions of approval was issued for Case No. FLS2008-07016 to
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-0 1001 - Page 1 of 9
convert the existing building from retail sales and services to a restaurant. Building Permit No.
BCP2008-05503 was issued August 21, 2008, to convert the existing building from retail sales and
services to a restaurant.
The surrounding neighborhood is a tourist area comprised of hotels/motels, retail sales establishments
and restaurants. The Hilton Hotel is located across Mandalay Avenue from the subject property. There
are adjacent restaurants to the north and east. Other retail sales establishments and restaurants exist
along Mandalay Avenue between the roundabout and Rockaway Street. City parking lot #34 is adjacent
to the south of the subject parcel.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to permit a sports-themed restaurant at this location through conversion of the existing
retail sales building and the construction of an approximate 1,800 square-foot addition to the east side of
the existing 2,584 square-foot building. The addition will contain the kitchen and restroom facilities for
the restaurant. The proposed addition includes a covered patio on its south side for a sidewalk cafe, and
a walk-in cooler/freezer on the east side of the addition. The design of the proposed addition will appear
as an extension of the existing building with a similar height and similar exterior material and color. The
proposal includes front, side and rear setback reductions to recognize the location of the existing building
at less than the required setbacks, but also to provide for the proposed building addition with similar
setbacks. There presently does not exist any foundation landscaping along the front of the building along
Mandalay Avenue. The application includes the reduction from five to zero feet of the required
foundation landscape area along the front of the building, which is not possible to install due to the
existing building's location at a zero front setback. A paver sidewalk along the south side of the
sidewalk cafe will provide required building egress to the City parking lot to the south. This pedestrian.
path to the City's parking lot will require the recording of an agreement to replace this required
accessible path should the City's property ever be sold for another use. There does exist landscaping
along the south side of the building, which was installed and is maintained by the City within an
easement obtained by the City on the subject property.
Due to the location of the existing building and the size and configuration of the subject property, this
site has not previously been provided with any on-site parking. The proposal includes a reduction to the
required parking for a restaurant from 66 spaces (based on 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet) to zero
spaces. The applicant has submitted a Parking Demand Study that analyzed the available parking within
1,000 feet of the subject property, north of the roundabout.
The restaurant is proposed to operate from 11:00 am to the latest of 2:00 am, typical of many beach
establishments. The proposal will utilize an existing community dumpster located on Poinsettia Avenue
to the southeast of this parcel.
Floor Area Ratio_(F.A.R.. Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, the maximum floor area
ratio for properties with a designation of Resort Facilities High is 1.0. The proposed one-story building
footprint produces a floor area ratio of 0.8 1, which is consistent with Code provisions.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to Section 2-801.1 of the Community Development Code
(CDC), the maximum allowable I.S.R. is 0.95. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.90, which is consistent
with the Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the CDC, the minimum lot area for
restaurants ranges between 5,000 -10,000 square feet. The subject property is 5,400 square feet in area.
Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for restaurants can range between 50 - 100 feet. The
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01001 - Page 2 of 9
lot width of this site along Mandalay Avenue is 50 feet. The proposal is consistent with these Code
provisions. ,I
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the CDC, the minimum front setback for restaurants can
range between zero - 15 feet, the minimum side setback can range between zero - 10 feet and the
minimum rear setback can range between 10 - 20 feet. The proposal includes a front (west) setback of
zero feet (to existing building), a side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing/proposed building), a side
(south) setback of 5.4 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to existing sidewalk) and a rear (east)
setback of 2.25 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk). The proposed rear
setback is one reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project.
The requested front setback reduction recognizes the building's existing location adjacent to the front
(west) property line. Most buildings along both sides of Mandalay Avenue are located in a similar
location adjacent to the front property line. While the request also recognizes the existing zero side
(north) setback of the existing building, the building addition is proposed at less than one-foot to permit
actual construction of the addition. The adjacent building to the north exists at a zero side setback to the
common property line. The existing building is located 5.82 feet from the side (south) property line at its
southwest corner. The building addition is proposed as an extension of the southern building fagade, but
due to a slight lot or building angle, the southeast corner of the building addition will be at a side (south)
setback of 5.47 feet. The main building addition is proposed at a rear (east) setback of five feet at its
southeast comer. The walk-in cooler/freezer on the rear of this building addition is proposed at a 2.25-
foot setback. A sidewalk to a rear door of the addition will provide access to the kitchen for deliveries
and taking out garbage and is located at a zero-foot rear setback. The interior of the existing building is
accessed from Mandalay Avenue by a sidewalk at its southwest comer, which exists at a zero-foot side
(south) setback. In order to provide access meeting Building and Fire Codes, a sidewalk is proposed
adjacent to the' south side of the proposed sidewalk cafe portion of the building addition and directs
persons to an access area in the adjacent City parking lot. This pedestrian path to the City's parking lot
will require the recording of an agreement to replace this required accessible path should the Citys
property ever be sold for another use. Given the character of the surrounding area, many properties along
both sides of Mandalay Avenue have similar setbacks where buildings have been constructed close to or
at the property lines. As such, the setbacks proposed in this request are appropriate and consistent with
the developed character of the surrounding area.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to Table 2-803 of the CDC, the maximum allowable height for
restaurants ranges between 25 - 100 feet. The existing building height is 13.3 feet to its flat roof. The
height of the building addition is proposed at a maximum of 14.67 feet to its flat roof. The existing and
proposed parapet around the building edge is 16 feet, well below the range permitted. Generally,
commercial buildings along both sides of Mandalay Avenue are one- to two-story stories in height. 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 CDC, the minimum required parking for
restaurants can range between seven and 15 parking space per 1,000 square feet, or between 31 - 66
required parking spaces. The existing building and site has no on-site parking with no ability to provide
any such parking. The proposal provides zero on-site parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a
Parking Demand Study of available parking within 1,000 feet of the subject property (north of the
roundabout). Many properties along Mandalay Avenue do not have any on-site parking of their own.
The proposed restaurant is located within walking distance of numerous motels, hotels and residences.
Businesses within this area rely on metered on-street parking and metered parking lots. City Parking Lot
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01001 - Page 3 of 9
#34, with 24 metered parking spaces, is located adjacent to the south side of the subject property. Most
people park and then walk to businesses, usually visiting more than one business. The Beach Trolley
also presently provides bus service from downtown to properties along Mandalay Avenue. The
submitted Parking Demand Study demonstrates that adequate parking is available within a reasonable
walking distance of this property to support the requested reduction to on-site parking. The proposed
parking reduction is another reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to Section 3-201.D.1 of the CDC, all outside mechanical equipment is
to be screened so as to not be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Mechanical
equipment is located on the existing building rooftop and mechanical equipment for the addition is
proposed to also be located on the roof The building's architect has indicated these rooftop mechanical
units will not be visible from the properties to the north and east, due to those building's location close to
or, adjacent to the common property lines. The building's architect has also indicated these rooftop
mechanical units will not be visible within 100 feet from the south and 250 feet from the west.
Compliance with the screening requirement for the mechanical equipment is best handled at the building
permit phase. Based upon this, the development proposal is consistent with the Code with regard to
screening of outdoor mechanical equipment.
Utilities: Pursuant to Section 3-911 of the CDC, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all
utilities including individual distribution lines shall be installed underground unless such undergrounding
is not practicable. Overhead utility lines presently feed the existing building. Plans for this proposal
indicate that new underground service will be provided, in conformance with this Code requirement.
Landscaping: The improvement value in relation to the current building value, pursuant to Section 3-
1202.A.3 of the CDC, requires landscaping to be brought into full compliance with.current Code
requirements. Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D of the CDC, there are no perimeter buffers required in the
Tourist District for this site. Since there is no parking lot on this property, there is no interior landscape
area requirement. CDC Section 3-1202.E.2 requires foundation landscaping aiong the frontage of a
building facade facing a street right-of-way. The building fronts on Mandalay Avenue, but due to its
proximity to the front property line, the applicant is unable to provide this required foundation
landscaping. Many properties on both sides of Mandalay Avenue do not have any foundation
landscaping. Given these circumstances, the application includes a request to reduce this requirement
from five to zero feet, which is appropriate.
There does exist landscaping along the south side of the building, which was installed and is maintained
by the City within an easement obtained by the City on the subject property. In order to construct the
proposed sidewalk along the south side of the sidewalk cafe, existing shrubs will need to be removed.
The location of the existing palm trees restricts the width of the sidewalk to a maximum of three feet,
which will be constructed with pavers. The applicant will need to coordinate with the Parks and
Recreation Department for the removal of these shrubs and any trees, including the existing irrigation for
such landscaping, and may require the applicant to assume maintenance of the landscaping and/or
irrigation.
Based on a 2006 aerial photo, there were a number of trees in the currently vacant area at the rear of the
property where the addition is planned that have been removed without a permit. Prior to the issuance of
a building permit, an after-the-fact permit will need to be obtained and either tree replacements or
payment in lieu be approved by the City's Land Resource Specialist.
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01001-- Page 4 of 9
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize an existing community dumpster located on Poinsettia Avenue to
the southeast of this parcel. Restaurant staff will need to transport the trash to this dumpster. The
proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department.
Si gnag . No freestanding signage is possible for this site due to the building's location on the site. Only
attached signage will be allowed. There presently is an attached sign on the west side of the building
along Mandalay Avenue. Code allowable window signage should be used otherwise. The southern
proposed elevation includes an existing banner that must be removed.
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 restaurant proposal with the standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2--803 of the Community
Development Code:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Maximum F.A.R. 1.0 5,400 ware feet 0.81 (4,3 85 square feet X
Maximum I.S.R. 0.95 0.90 X
Minimum Lot Area 5,000 - 10 000 s q. ft. 5,400 square feet X
Minimum Lot Width 50 - 100 feet 50 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: 0- 15 feet Zero feet (to existing X'
building)
Side: 0 - 10 feet North: Zero feet (to X'
existing/proposed building)
South: 5.4 feet (to proposed X'
building); zero feet (to
xistin sidewalk
Rear: 10 - 20 feet 2.25 feet (to proposed X'
building) and zero feet (to
proposed sidewalk
Maximum Height 25 - 100 feet Existing: 13.3 feet (to flat X
roof);
Proposed addition: 14.67
feet to flat roof)
Minimum Off-Street Seven - 15 spaces per 1,000 square Zero spaces X'
Parkin feet 31 - 66 spaces)
' See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01 001 -Page 5 of 9
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 from X
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 proposed X
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
.... Diking 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 forrn 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 aoorouriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-0 1001 - Page 6 of 9
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:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harrnony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
1 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 adiacent oroverties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of February 5, 2009, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move
forward to the Community Development Board (CDB).
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 0.12 acres is located on the east side of Mandalay Avenue, approximately 50 feet south of
PnnnvnQtr PPt
2. The subject property is located within the Retail and Restaurant Character District of Beach by
Design;
3. The site, until recently, has operated as a retail sales and services establishment;
4. On July 25, 2008, a Development Order with four conditions of approval was issued for Case No.
FLS2008-07016 to convert the existing building from retail sales and services to a restaurant.
Building Permit No. BCP2008-05503 was issued August 21, 2008, to convert the existing building
from retail sales and services to a restaurant;
5. A Unity of Title tying the lots included in this parcel's legal description was recorded in OR Book
16323, Page 2372;
6. City parking lot #34, with 24 metered parking spaces, is adjacent to the south of the subject parcel;
7. The surrounding neighborhood is a tourist area comprised of hotels/motels, retail sales
establishments and restaurants;
8. The proposal is to permit a sports-themed restaurant at this location through conversion of the
existing retail sales building and the construction of an approximate 1,800 square-foot addition to the
east side of the existing 2,584 square-foot building;
9. The design of the proposed addition will appear as an extension of the existing building with a
similar height and similar exterior material and color;
10. The proposal includes front, side and rear setback reductions to recognize the location of the existing
building at less than the required setbacks, but also to provide for the proposed building addition with
similar setbacks;
Community Development Board - March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01 001 -Page 7 of 9
11, The application includes the reduction from five to zero feet of the required foundation landscape
area along the front of the building, which is not possible to install due to the existing building's
location at a zero front setback;
12. Due to the location of the existing building and the size and configuration of the subject property,
this site has not previously been provided with any on-site parking;
13. The proposal includes a reduction to required parking for a restaurant from 66 spaces (based on 15
spaces per 1,000 square feet) to zero spaces;
14. The submitted Parking Demand Study demonstrates that adequate parking is available within a
reasonable walking distance of this property to support the requested reduction to on-site parking;
and
15. There are no current outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
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 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; and
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as
per Section 3-913.A of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development
application to permit a restaurant with an accessory sidewalk cafe in the Tourist (T) District with a lot
area of 5,400 square feet, a lot width of 50 feet, a front (west) setback of zero feet (to existing building),
a side (north) setback of zero feet (to existing/proposed building), a side (south) setback of 5.4 feet (to
proposed building) and zero feet (to existing sidewalk), a rear (east) setback of 2.25 feet (to proposed
building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk); a building height of 14.67 feet (tn flat roof) ?nd 7Prn
parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Lntill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C; and a reduction to the foundation landscaping along
Mandalay Avenue from five to zero feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions
of CDC Section 3-1202.G, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That the final design and color of the restaurant building be consistent with the elevations approved
by the CDB;
2. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, an agreement acceptable to the Engineering
Department be recorded in the public records indicating the applicant will provide alternative access
to the public sidewalk on Mandalay Avenue from the secondary building exit should the City or
successor in title to ownership of the City-owned parking lot change the use of the parking lot
thereby blocking access to the public sidewalk. Such agreement shall further make clear the
applicant agrees to pay all costs associated with restoring access to the public sidewalk and meet all
applicable accessibility Code requirements;
3. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, screening requirements for rooftop mechanical units
be approved by the Planning Department;
4. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant coordinate the removal of shrubs and
trees and existing irrigation with the Parks and Recreation Department to construct the paver
sidewalk along the south side of the sidewalk cafe, which may require the applicant to assume
maintenance of the landscaping and/or irrigation;
Community Development Board -- March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01001 - Page 8 of 9
5. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, an after-the-fact permit be obtained for trees removed
from the rear area of the subject property, providing either tree replacements or payment in lieu, as
approved by the City's Land Resource Specialist; and
6. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, all requirements of General Engineering, Stormwater
Engineering and the Land Resource Specialist be addressed.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff:
Wayne I Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
? Location Map
Q Aerial Map
? Zoning Map
? Existing Surrounding Uses Map
U Photographs of Site and Vicinity
S. (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cases)Up for the next CDBIMandalay 0431 Way Cool Grill (7) 2009-03 3.17.09 CDB -
WWIMandalay 431 StaffReport.doc
Community Development Board -- March 17, 2009
FLD2009-01 001 - Page 9 of 9
Wayne M. Wells, AICP
] 00 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756
Phone: 727-562.4504 1 Email: wayne.wells(a?miyclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
¦ Planner III
Planning Department, City of Clearwater, FL
November 2001 to Present
As part of the Development Review Division, prepared and presented staff reports for Flexible
Standard Development (staff-level cases), Flexible Development (public hearing cases) and Plats
before the Development Review Committee and the Community Development Board and
Development Agreements before the City Council; Reviewed building permits for Code
conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information
(via telephone, mail, email, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings).
• Zoning Coordinator
Zoning Division, City of Pinellas Park, FL
March 1989 to November 2001
Acting Zoning Director; Represented the Zoning Division on cases and issues before the City
Council, Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of
Adjustment and outside agencies; Prepared and presented staff reports for land use plan amendments,
rezoned, planned unit developments, conditional uses, variances and site plans; Reviewed final site
plans and building permits for Code conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code
amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment
meetings).
¦ Program Manager, Zoning Branch
Manatee County Dept. of Planning and Development, Bradenton, FL June 1984 to March 1989
Trained and supervised three employees; Prepared and presented variances and appeals to the Board
of Zoning Appeals; Coordinated final site plan and building permit review for Code conformance;
Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail,
zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). Interim Code Enforcement Manager- Managed the
Code Enforcement Section; Supervised six employees; Prosecuted cases before the Code
Enforcement Board; Investigated and prepared cases of alleged violations of land use and building
codes. Planner H, Current Planning Section - Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones,
planned developments, special permits, plats and mobile home parks to Planning Commission and
Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code
enforcement; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via
telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings).
¦ Planner I
Alachua County Dept. of Planning and Development, Gainesville, FL June 1980 to June 1984
Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones and special permits to Planning Conunission and
Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed site plans and plats for Code conformance; Assisted in
preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter
or predevelopment meetings). Intern - Compiled and coordinated the Alachua County Information
and Data Book; Drafted ordinance revisions; General research.
Graduate Assistant
University of Florida Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning, Gainesville, FL 1979 to 1981
Coordinated downtown study for Mayo, FL; Coordinated graphics for Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan.
¦ Planning Technician
Planning Division, City of St. Petersburg, FL
1977 to 1979
Primarily prepared graphics, for both publication and presentation; Division photographer for 1 %2
years; Worked on historic survey and report.
EDUCATION
Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning (Degree not conferred; course work completed, thesis not
completed), University of Florida, 1981
Bachelor of Design in Architecture, University of Florida, 1976
LICENSES & CERTIFICATES
American Institute of Certified Planners
American Planning Association, Suncoast Section
SITE
Pier r'0
0 Causeway Blvd tr"c
0 FIRST
S
ST
a
a
secoruD "
Sr DR
THIRD
sr
a
0
LOCATION MAP
Owners: C. John Re, Peter Pullara, Joseph A. Case: FLD2009-01001
Pullara
Site: 431 Mandalay Avenue Property Size: 0.123 acres
PIN: 08-29-15-02592-001-0030 Atlas Page: 267A
,
...,;....
AERIAL MAP
Owners:
C. John Re, Peter Pullara, Joseph A.
Pullara
Case:
FLD2009-0 1 001
Site:
431 Mandalay Avenue
Property Size:
0.123 acres
PIN:
08-29-15-02592-001-0030
Atlas Page:
267A
i
74378
' 78 7 4•g -
- 38 5 480 6 480
...
35
6 475 e
4 r?
4 n'
472 S
4 _ \\„ J/ 7
32 7 0 0
nofcl 470
-
,. 31 415 8
a 464 3 ?r
,
0 471
29
7? X67 28? 9 g 466 (V 7
PHASE1 74 c 27,? 10 470 10 g 5
P m 3 :48 499 25 r
7L F 7 457' '? 11 464 T -11 465 _
9
L4658 060
7 463
7._ ' I3 23 J 4 45 Co
4
79 Obi / 459 22 _ 12 - 4 1 12 - -
-
10
t79(S1 ` 345 -
45 I `" i ?9 ?p -? 13 4554 - -
S PHASE 2
m^ 9
---
18
Ate 18 14 14 -
g3 993
1
11
- -
-
-
teas w ° saw 441 17 ,s 15
1 12
9 16
((?
a5 YA S
:T tR 1 441
42 1
T i?
; - r 41 432 L 2436 425 2
R 430 ? ?9---5 - 40 Z 439 3-
423 3
'
-425' 0 39 $28 4
1 - - -
_
Q 8
2 421-9 -I 38
429 gg
10 5 426 419
-
? -
-
41Z 11
415 12 37 B 6
-
? - - - -
413 13
422 7
A 36
7
411 14
40915 4238 8
C 8 --- - ' __-
40 16 423A
40517 406 N 11 g
34
00
403 18
90112 - 33 a 10 409 10
20
400
- - - ?. - - - ^? -
22 32 11 406 405 11
23
31 12 12 - -
26 30 400 13 403 13
sss?s 385 27- 29 14400 40i 14 60
e
?
N IAL Ymw
ZONING MAP
Owners: C. John Re, Peter Pullara, Joseph A. Case: FLD2009-01001
Pullara
Site: -431 Mandalay Avenue Property Size. 0.123 acres
PIN: 08-29-15-02592-001-0030 Atlas Page: 267A
. . .
View looking N at subject property and E side of Mandalay
A venue beyond subject property
View looking NW at property due E of subject property (432
Poinsettia Avenue) (City parking lot in foreground)
View looking SWat Hilton Hotel (400 Mandalay Avenue)
--- ~
...~
"'~...
; I I. i \ \ \ \ . " -
II, ;'11 f\1 \,\\\\ " '."
I ./J.. I. (I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \,
I..dJ....li,-~.
View looking NW at subject property (City parking lot in
foreground)
."..
I ' ~
View looking S at E side of Mandalay Avenue south of
subject property
View looking NW at W side of Mandalay Avenue N of
Papaya Street
431 Mandalay Avenue
FLD2009-01001
A.'
Feb. 12, 2009
City of Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756
Re: Flexible Development Application
Comprehensive Infill
431 Mandalay Ave.
To whom it may concern,
The following letter is a request for approval of the attached application for the project at the above
referenced address.
This project is the increase in building area by 1,801 sq. ft, to a total of 4,385 sq.ft._ The increased area is
to accommodate a new kitchen, toilet rooms, a walk-in cooler and a covered patio to accommodate
patrons that wish to smoke.
This parcel is bound on the north by a two story building (commercial on the ground floor and
residential on the top floor), on the east by a commercial strip center and Poinsettia Ave., on the south
by a city parking lot and a bank building, and on the west Mandalay Ave. and the parking lot for the
Hilton Hotel.
This application would require the following request to be granted.
1. The change in use from the present retail to a restaurant use.
2. To allow the addition that is proposed there would be a reduction in the required set backs.
The front is 0' and will remain 0', code is 0'-15'. Thus a wavier of 15'.
The north side is 0 .4' existing, the addition would be 0.8'; the code is 0'-10'. Thus a wavier
of 92'.
The south side varies from 5.82' to 5.47" at the end of the proposed addition, required is 0'-
10'. Thus a wavier of 4.53'.
The west end which is the rear requires a 10'-20' set back the existing build average is
46.67'. The proposed addition would average 2.25'-5.02, thus requiring a wavier of 17.75
7.75'-14.98' (7.75' -- 4.98').
3. The addition would increase the size of the building by 1,801 sq.ft. to a total of 4,385 sq.ft..
The parking required is 7-15/1000 sq.ft. of gross floor area therefore the spaces required
would be 31-66. We are asking for a wavier to 0. This building has never had on site parking.
We have attached a parking demand study indicating adequate off site parking is available.
top air -Now
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater, Ftarida 33756 727.796.8774 727.791.6942 fax
FLD Comp Infill request
431 Mandalay
Feb. 12, 2009
Pg #2
This application for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project requires the above items to be
considered as waivers to the code requirements. In addition to those we have some general items to be
considered before final approval may be granted.
The storm water narrative as requested in Section E of the application is as follows: This property is
located on Clearwater Beach. The property has an I. S.R. of 57 %. We are increasing the I, S.R. to 90 %
and we have agreed to pay in lieu of versus trying to create a storm water retention system. We will
apply to SWFWMD for a wavier letter for a property less than an acre.
A comprehensive landscape has to be proposed. The proposed addition would bring the lot coverage to
90% we are allowed by code to have 95%. We request a wavier from 5' to 0' of required foundation
planting along Mandalay Ave. (west side). The request for the expansion if approved would eliminate
landscaping on the north side and limited areas on the east side to small areas. The existing landscaping
on the south side of the building was placed there by the city as a buffer along the city's parking lot. We
will have to remove some of the shrub material and possible a few palms, in the area of the addition to
install a sidewalk for required egress thru the lot. This will be discussed with Engineering and Building
to insure the best possible solution for access and landscaping. The landscaped areas are presently
irrigated.
The solid waste department has approved off site pick up for the restaurant use as a joint dumpster with
adjacent properties.
The building design has been altered to eliminate the necessity of a fire sprinkled system.
We believe this is a reasonable request in lieu of the value of property on the beach. The approval of this
proposed expansion would add to the variety of places for the tourist and local beach goers to spend time
at the beach.
:Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
? SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
? SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
Q SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $
l r
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive hifill Redevelopment Project
rpemiGpyt n7111/700R)
PLFASL 'H'YPE OR PREXT-
A. APPLICANT, PROF
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
'ERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Cade Section 4-202.A)
2 v' 33
6 ?. Z1 O
-e r FAX NUMBER:
EMAIL:
Ilu?-?, JCe=1efJL?7'?,r f eA 114VA -
r
T?'?7
1??_ b77 ? ) r 3PZ I
04.4. EDI 9?? FAX NUMBER: 1._ZocG4 f-
EMAIL:
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMA
PROJECT NAME: 4??? C?iflL
STREET ADDRESS
PARCEL NUMBER(S): d JZC /I'_7
PARCEL SIZE (acres):
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
'ION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
&1P_1 L-,t, PROJECT VALUATION: $
60 1 /00 ?
n , PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 7
r
`? } Sri a2. ? I?Ffi?
st t
uare
and all
-?.°.?
reduction in required number of ,y A /?/ o
oarkina spaces. speck use, etc.) rt° 1 ton . IN` V° s
PROPOSED USE(S):
DESCRIPTION OF REQUES
Speoficallyidentify the reque
onclude number of units or sq
footage of non-residential use
requested code deviations; e.
cnDocuments and settings\derekrerguson\Desiftp\plan imp dWtorms 07080exible Deverorment(FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT R TS ) A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES LJ NO? (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
? SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D.
?
1. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913,A)
Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA- Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail:
The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it
is located.
The expansion of this building will be in harmony with the adjacent properties in size and lot coverage. It will link
this property to the building east with a sidewalk The use of a restaurant would be consistent with the property to
the north and the east. The building to the north is 2 story while the building to the east is basically 1 story.
1 The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof.
The adjacent properties to the north and the east are fully developed both containing restaurant use and retail.
The development of this property should have no impact on the property values of the adjacent ones. If anything
it may increase the pedestrian traffic to benefit their business as well.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use_
The development of this small portion of vacant land will actually remove possible areas that may harbor
unwanted vermin or insects as well as the possible unwanted person. This improvement would also add some
activity in a portion of a somewhat dimly lighted adjacent parking lot.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
We have conducted a traffic demand study for this proposed expansion and we have discovered that many of the
establishments on the beach do not have on site parking. As well the existing available parking is typically not
fully used. Many people park and walk to the beach, shopping or eating. As well we will have hotel patrons.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The conversion and expansion of the building in to a restaurant is very in keeping with many of the adjacent as
well as neighboring properties. The addition of another restaurant in the area that may cater to a more casual
cliental will create more pedestrian traffic for other business on the north end of the of the beach,
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties-
This restaurant will operate typically from 11:00am to at the latest 2:00am, which is typical for many beach
establishments. The building as proposed is enclosed with a small covered patio area the would be utilized for
smoking patrons. Therefore there is minimal impact to adjacent properties.
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 _doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
? Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE IN FILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this
zoning district.
_
This is a small piece of property with a existing building now. We are
proposing extend the north line to the east & reducing the east which set has a ) set back as requested o_ sides he adjc
-,^ - -" -- - (as is similar to t ent
properties). The south existing set back would stay the same as well. Lack of on site parking,. see demand study.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of 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
This request for expansion is going to improve the property into a viable source of a place for beach patrons to
spend time and enjoy the beach community. With out these approvals this project will not happen. The beach by
desgin should have as an underlying factor of promoting good quality design and business, which this will be.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties-
The approval of this request would be consistent with the development of other parcels to the north and the east.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
The approval of this property for the use of a restaurant would be consistent with the adjacent property uses.
The use to the north is a restaurant more in keeping with the Beachcomber. The use to the east is Oriental, pizza,
Island Grill and a tattoo shop. We will be different type of establishment with more of a sports theme.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use 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.
This use is permitted in the "T" tourist district, the addition to the building is within the reasonable guidelines of
the flexible development in the Clearwater Beach community. We have done a parking demand study which
f
__
indicates there is ample public parking within walking distance of this property.
---- - - -- -- ---- -
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street 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. .
Approving this expansion will not impede development of adjacent properties. It does comply with the City's guide-
lines. The scale is in keeping with the existing adjacent properties. We are continuing the use of existing trim on to
for outdoor use. We are using warm colors t to keep the tropical beach T?
addition, creating covered area felling.
the
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.d0c
Page 3 of 8
E. STORMWATER PLAN
Manual and 4-202.A.21)
SUEMf'FTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Stcrm Drainage Design crlterla
A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition
or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement.
? If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt.
? At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following;
? Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines'.
CI Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures;
? All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
? Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
? A narrative describing the proposed stomrwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with
the City manual.
? Proposed stormwater detentiontretention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
? Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations.
? COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT
SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable
? ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Stormwater plan as noted above is included
Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished Floor
elevations shall be provided.
CAUTION -- IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN
AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION. MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY
MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 552-4750.
F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies;
? TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location,
including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - please design around the existing trees;
p TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4° DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of
such trees;
LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces).
Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and
shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not
deviations to the parking standards are approved;
? GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
? PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided);
? COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable;
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 _doe
Page 4 of 8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL. REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A)
I SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 361:
Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
North arrow;
Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
All-dimensions;
K Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures;
Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures;
All required setbacks:
f' All existing and proposed points of access;
All required sight triangles;
Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including
description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements;
Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site;
Location of. existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas
and water lines;
All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas;
Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening
{per Section 3-201(D)(7 and Index #701);
)v Location of all landscape material;
Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities;
Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
x Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals- A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a
Level Two approval.
SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form:
Land area in square feet and acres;
Number of EXISTING dwelling units;
- Number of PROPOSED dwelling units;
Gross floor area devoted to each use;
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the
number of required spaces;
Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways,
expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility
easement;
Building and structure heights;
Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and
Floor area ratio (F.A_R.) for all nonresidential uses.
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
ht ?
p Lp - ?o
a ?
1 W a 11-F70 top
REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'!z X 11);
? FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan:
One-foot contours or spot elevations on site;
Offske elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stonnwater management for the parcel;
All open space areas;
Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms;
Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned);
Streets and drives (dimensioned);
Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned);
Structural overhangs;
OA
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.terguson\Desktoplplanning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 5 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL. REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102_A)
LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24"x 36"):
All existing and proposed structures;
/ Names of abutting streets;
Drainage and retention areas including swaies, side slopes and bottom elevations;
pelineation ehd dimensions of all required perimeter landscape duffers;
Sight visibility triangles;
Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
tree survey);
Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
schedule;
Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfllling, mulching and
protective measures;
.Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
percentage covered;
Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
Irrigation notes.
? REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'AX11);
X COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met.
1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information:
All sides of all buildings
Dimensioned
Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
Materials
REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 8 %X 11
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS/ Section 3-1806)
K All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc-), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
? All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing;
freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals)
CI - Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required).
? Reduced signage proposal (8'/2 X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
C:\Documents and Settings?derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 070$\Comprehensive Infill Project (PLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 6 of 8
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C)
O Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development:
• Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day.
• Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or
that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections.
Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Mnnual_
The'Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic. Operations Manager and the
Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750)
Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement.
t3 Ackhowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Traffic impact Study is included. The study must incude a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all
. roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting.
Traffic impact Study is not required. IV `Y?' `? ?" 'FrL/ Dye
CAUTION -- IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULT
STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED,
SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT
APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-
4750.
L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY: y is
and Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION_ENGINEER to assure an adequate st be ab e1 tto supplort the dabble of any retuned fire
any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply
sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required the water supply must be able to supply 150%. of its rated capacity. Compliance with
the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required.
X Acknowledgement of fire flow calculationstwater study requirements (Applicant must initial one.of the following):
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included,
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is not required.
CAUTION IF REVIEW RESULTS N
NONE HAS. BEENBSUBM SUBMITTED, ' Mu T BE
CALCULATIONS/
RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact Me City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334_
M. SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made
in this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
phut raph the property described in this application.
[ j
r
Signature of property owne epr ntative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINEI,LAS
Swo to and subscribed before me this day of
A.D. 20 j? to me and/or by
ry who is personally known has
produced
as Identification.
ry pu i NOT Y Pi7BLIC•5 A E OF A
My commiss on expires: • ` ""?., Z y11i1 ?. j1/j3t2W5 .
- cnn
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept for ms 070r.Comprehensive Infill
Page 'i of R
Expppires: OCT. 13, 2011
?D) 2008 078 docG Co.,ivC.
N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
1. names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names:
Provide
`
+ V
Q..
2. of the following described property (address or general location):
r(s)
That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title hhoolde
?
g
ne ^
` `t J I" w?v Vv e
3. '
orr which a request for a: (describe req st)
That this property constitutes the property f
r
y
A ?
4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and es/do) appoint:
as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition:
5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City
representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application;
7. That (1/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true a
Pro rty Owner party Owner
Pr -' Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
his day of
Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the`avy?sut theme to gf lorid,? o;,t
11c?
f 1
r`l
r
Gt
` -
personally appeared CC& lil.l7 ?p h V'e who having been first duly sworn
Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed.
NOTARY PUBUC-STATE OF FLORIDA
?
Lynn A. Matthew$
y
Comtdt6!oq#DD717600
2011
13
OCT
W
,
.
a Exp1m.
BDNDIMTHRUATIAN CBONDINGGM,INC• Notary Public5ig ature
Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires:
C_I)wurnents and 5Ydtingslderek Tams 070BWIe R* Development (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
RECEPAW7
.0,-,N 02 20x4
ory 4F *i
- *
Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727562-4567
Fax: 727-562A865
Q SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
Cl SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and
application are requiredto be collated, stapled and folded i nto sets
CASE N UMBER:
RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: ATOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN
CONJUNCTION W ITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ON E OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION.
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
(Revised 03/29/2006)
-PLEASE TYPE OR ]PRINT-
APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPL ICANT N AM E: . ? t Fif, , tl'
MAILINGADDRESS; I•(?+(?r ,+r/'A'G? 1 /I! i C1 ??l?l?L ??
PHONE NUMBER: 1 , ?-'j4. -?,•1 ,?2 CELLNUMBER:
PROPERTY OW HER(S):
List ALL owners onthe deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
Y°?tFAX NUMBER:
E-MAILADDRESS:
1. ARCHITECTURAL THEME:
a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings
proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for thede.veloprent. i I a '
v?ra I. h1° \/- S I' to. C)'+ fz?)v t )C)Q ldrl "lCly n? MOTIPI
7"'
Ors W4- .V,)l ,l rIG ?,°b?;U WI[` v??Je o(?
b- The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment p oposed in the Comprehensivendscapc Program shall be
demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape
standards.
C:00cuments and Settings lderekfergusonU]asktopln ew#a nningfi/es1C ompr ehe nsive Landscape Pro 7a m 2W6.d oc
Page 1 of 2
. . .
2. LIGHTING:
t? i U4{'?f "?i
3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the commru nity c haracter of the C ityof Clearvate .
4. PROPERTY VALUES:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program Will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in'the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ,
s?v"r.? A L" i r' W de ? CA MCD V ' 0_?. Ltol r t. I. +` P) M/1,CV A G1-6 .?O d_7.!P S. SPECIAL AREAOR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent %,jth anyspecial area or scenic corridor plan which
the City of-Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area i n which the parcel pro posed for d ewl op me nt is located-
THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3, DIVISION 12 MAY BE WAIVED OR MODIFIED AS A PART OF A LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL
WO APPLICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IF THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL INCLUDES A COMPREHENSIVE
LANDSCAPE PROGRAM, WHICH SATISFIES THE ABOVE CRITERIA. THE USE OF LANDSCAPE PLAN, SECTIONS / ELEVATIONS,
RENDERINGS AND PERSPECTIVES MAYBE NE05SSARYTO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS VWORKSH EE=T.
SIGNATURE:.
[,the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations rcadein
this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
photogrgp§-*w,property described inthis application-
Signature of prop erty owner or repr?s?tiT
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINE LAS
Sworn to a nd s ubscribed before me this day of
4 A.D_20.C:L?__ to me and/or by
51XPuLt rL'Y`C C _, who is personally known has
produced
as identificati on.
`_U rypu lic,
Mycom ' sion e)pires: ?`OTAtM nlrr3LIC-STATE OF p' RIDA
Co>imissioi) #DD717600
`Expires: OCT. 13, 2011
ni:".v ATLluN"fic solvnrnc co.; D;C.
C:tDocumentsandSettings lderek.ferguson0esk:opre;vFdannin,cfrlesQomprehensive.a ape Program2006.doc
Flag e 2 of 2
Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program is autocratically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the
F,cnacc is 'l-A
PARKING ANALYSIS FOR
WAY COOL GRILL
431 Mandalay Avenue
Clearwater Beach
Florida
Ittligir Ammigig
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater, Florida 33756 727.796.8774 727.791.6942 fax
INTRODUCTION
The 0. 12 acre project site is located at 431 Mandalay Avenue and is currently zoned for
retail sales. The site will be redeveloped as a restaurant containing 4,385 square feet. The
site is located on the west side of Mandalay just south of Papaya Street on the north side
of the City parking lot number 34. This is located in Tourist (T) zoning district, and per
Section 2-802 of the Community Development Code has a minimum parking requirement
of 7-15 spaces per 1,000 square feet of space. According to the strict interpretation of the
code, the proposed development would require a minimum of 31 and a maximum of 66
parking spaces on site. The proposed plan indicates no on site parking exists nor is
proposed. Therefore there will be a deficiency of 31-66 spaces will occur.
The code provides for reducing the required number of parking spaces to recognize the
special situations that exist on Clearwater Beach. Under the Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment in Division 8 item 9, adequate offsite parking maybe used in lieu of
onsite if there is adequate parking within 1,000 feet of the property.
City of Clearwater staff recognized the existence of retail and restaurants on Clearwater
Beach, in close proximity to municipal parking lots, on-street parking spaces, nearby
hotels and residential condominiums within walking distance, as well as daily beach
goers, have a great potential for walk-up customers. The Beach Trolley also stops near
the site. Staff also recognizes the available public parking in the public lots and the on
street parking serve two functions. One to serve the beachgoers and two to provide
parking for the beach related businesses. The parking analysis was prepared to determine
the availability of parking space with in the 1,000 feet but limited to north of the round-
about.
METHODOLGY
Prior to conducting the analysis a methodology was established with the City of
Clearwater staff. It was agreed that we would conduct a parking accumulation study on
Saturday (February 7, 2009) between the hours of 9:30 am -- 9:30 pm. This study area
included on street parking along Mandalay Ave from the Hilton's south driveway to
Baymont Street, Papaya Street, Baymont Street, East Street, and Poinsettia Street The
following City lots were included, # 34, #35, #43, and the temporary lot located to the
north of lot 443. There are a total of 240-249 spaces available depending on the posted
parking times.
EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
The existing conditions were established by conducting parking counts between the hours
of 9:30am - 9:30pm on an hourly basis for the number of spaces occupied. These
numbers were accumulated by the hour for on street metered and non metered space as
well as the metered lots. The totals per hour based on usage and available were
summarized in a table. Weather conditions were sunny with a high for the day at 75
degrees and a late evening of 50 degrees.
In the subject area there are a total of 76 on street metered spaces, 122 lot metered spaces,
and there are another 51 non metered space available. This is a total of 249 spaces for
public parking, 9 of these spaces are limited to no parking between Sam - 6pm.
The count has been broken down to indicate the numbers of cars that were parked in
specific areas. There is also a tabulation of the total per hour compared to the amount
available. This is also depicted in a graph format.
CONCLUSION
This analysis was conducted in accordance with a methodology as established with the
City of Clearwater staff. The analysis demonstrates of the 249 total parking spaces
included in the study area a maximum of 153 were occupied during any hour (2:30pm) of
the study period. As such, adequate parking is available within reasonable walking
distance of this project to support the reduction in on site parking spaces.
RA-ERED STREET PARKING
TIME
10:30 AM
11:30 AM
12:30 PM
1:30 PLI
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
6:30 PM
7:30 PM
6:30 PM
9:30 PM
M ANDALAY AVENU E STREET PARKIN G PAPYA STREET SAN MARC O STREET BAYMON T STREET
HILTON T O PAPYA PAPYA TO S AN MARCO SAN MARCO TO BAYMONT
TOTAL
OCC
TOTAL
OGG.
TOTAL
OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OGG. TOTAL OCC. . 1 26
6 15 0 12 2 12 3 7 0 4
4 2 26
9 15 4 12 5 V 6 7 0
1 4 3 26
11 15 3 12 7 12 6 7
7 0 4 17 26
15 15 6 12 10 12 7 7 4 4 15 26
14 15 10 12 8 12 7 4 4 9 26
13 15 6 12 10 12 4 7
7 0 4 10 26
10 15 7 12 5 12 7
7
0
4 10
26
11 15 6 12 6 72 6
7
0
4 9
9
26
9 15 7 12 8 12 4 7 0 4 13 26
11 15 8 12 8 12 2 7 0 4 12 26
10 15 6 12 3 12 3 7 0 4 8 26
11 15 4 12 3 12 2
CITY PARKING LOTS
TEMP. LOT LOT # 43 LOT # 34 LOT # 35
OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL
0 4q 4 26 4 24 1 25
7 44 5 28 5 24 0 26
10 44 7 28 7 24 4 26
14 44 11 28 9 24 5 26
25 44 22 28 16 24 5 26
1B 44 21 28 19 24 8 26
13 44 22 26 23 24 4 26
B 44 20 28 11 24 8 26
ii 44 17 28 14 24 10 26
3 44 12 26 17 24 19 26
2 44 7 28 10 24 15 26
0 44 5 26 11 24 13 26
TIME
10:30 AM
11:30 AM
12:30 PM
1:30 PM
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
6:30 PM
7:30 PM
8:30 PM
9:30 PM
TIME
10:30 AM
11:30 AM
12:30 PM
1:30 PM
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
5:30 PM
7:30 PM
6:30 PM
9:30 PM
NON METERED STREET PARKING
EAST STREET BAYMONT POINTSEITEA PAPYA
OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL
2 5 9 19 10 15 2 3
3 5 3 19 11 15 3 3
2 5 4 19 10 15 2 3
3 5 8 19 11 15 3 3
3 5 10 19 11 15 3 3
2 5 10 19 11 15 3 3
4 5 8 19 12 15 3 3
4 5 8 19 12 15 3 3
3 5 8 19 10 15 12 12
3 5 6 19 10 15 12 12
1 5 6 19 10 15 11 12
2 5 4 19 8 15 8 12
TIME
10:30 AM
11:30 AM
12:30 PM
1:30 PM
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
6:30 PM
7:30 PM
8:30 PM
9:30 PM
CALCULATION TOTALS
SPACES
AVAILABLE TOTAL SPACES OCCUPIED
SPACES
196 240 44
177 240 63
163 240 77
121 240 1i9
87 240 153
102 240 138
112 240 128
127 240 113
127 249 122
125 249 124
153 249 96
170 249 79
180
en
w
u 150
<(
D-
en
(9
z 120
52
0::
<(
D-
90
.
..
240
210
60
30
o
10:30 AM 11 :30 AM 12:30 PM 1 :30 PM 2:30 PM 3:30 PM 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 6:30 PM 7:30 PM 8:30 PM 9:30 PM
-+-SPACES AVAILABLE
__&_TOTAL SPACES
OCCUPIED SPACES I
TIME OF DAY
tJu U 1'" UAl<. y ~Ul<' v b Y
&~
- ........
~-
lf)lf)
. \0
0\ .
"'i'0\
"'i'
1\
I
I
t-
I
BLOCK CORNER
FD Nt-D
lB #577G
I
fP~
a"
00
;..;::tl
('f)r-/
o ('f)
\00
0\0
Zz
S90000'OO"E
S89056'30"E
108.20' (P)
108.58' (M)
I
TRASH CAN
2 STORY
COMMERCIAL
LOT 2
I
I
"
LOT 42
~ ~
? ~ Z
,L; <r:;!-< >-<
rTl -J Z c;i
I-"-i 0.. ~ ~
:> ~~~
-" ~>!5o
"'-i ~~oz
'-' ~f-<f-<::J
~ -J-J- 0
<r: ::J<r:;~m
. 1 ~$.6i5
""""' >-< (fJ ~ ::J
-" <r:; <r:;::J 0
"'-i -J ~ U (fJ
Q <r:;8>-<
Z O$~
Z -J
<r:;\o-J
~ ;;;"",<r:;
"'-i -:::.- >
~
I
COVERED UTILITIES ::
57.24'
BLDG
0.45' N.
b
.,.
o
BLDG
O.IG' N.
I
I STORY
COMMERCIAL
431 MANDALAY AVENUE
PP
FD V2" IP
NO ID
G' elf t-
0.55' 5-:--
050'W
49./9'
"
<<
6
"-'
::i
"""' ~
&:$ PLANTER
- ........
gb
o c:i q METAL BOX
glf)~
o
m
:r:~~
f-<b"
~o~
2 f;:; ~
o 0
:g~
Zz
LOT 3
BLOCK A
GW
"""'~
&-<
........
b-
olf)
,0\
o .
If)~
fD
CROWS fOOT' "
P ARKJ NG
METER
PLANTER
A~~g~___u___ h
3A' X4B' il
CONe PAD /
LOT 4
BLOCK A I
G'PVC
455' N.
- ONe _ I .27' w.
G'P:-C~
4408' ~- I
~$
b"
00
...J% ;..; ~
~~~
G' Clf , Cf) Cf)
G' IRON GATE
Q.97'W. ;
LOT 41
RAISED
CONCRETE
I STORY
COMMERCIAL
N
i
PLANTER
40.00'
12.24'
G224'
I
~
Ii
fO NtD
lB #7243
Y2" CONG CURBING
~
,n
N90000'OO"W
N90000'OO"W
108.20' (P)
108.09' (M)
ORICK
LOT 5 I
---~
LOT 40
A5f~~IALT PARKING
LEGEND:
--
(I') PLAT
(~I) t.,'tEASU;~ED
I'D FOUND
CONC CONCRETE
WI WITH
EM ELECrRlC METER
IR IRON ROD
OHE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
ID IDENTIFICATION
WM WATER METER
II' IRON PIPE
PIP PINCHED IRON PIPE
CLF CHAIN LINK FENCE
LB LICENSED BUSINESS
PI' POWER POLE
YC YELLOW CAP
@ SANITARY MANHOLE
@ DENOTES A NAIL & DISK (FD)
: DENOTES A y," IRON ROD & CAP
<t CENTERLINE
~ AIR CONDITIONER
J
t
W -~:-E
I
S
~
( IN FEET)
1 inch =20tt.
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
1. THIS IS A BOUNDARY SURVEY.
2. HASIS or HEARING: THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE 01' LOT 4, BLOCK A, BEARING: N90.00'00"W,
ACCOlmING TO TIlE PLAT THEREOF.
3, NO UNDEI,GIWUND UTILITIES, UNDERGROUND ENCI,OACHMENTS OR BUILDING FOUNDATIONS
WERE MEASURED OR LOCATED AS PART OF THIS SURVEY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED,
4, NO IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN LOCATED,
5. THIS SURVEY DOES NOT REFLECT OR DETERMINE OWNERSHIP,
6, ATTENTION IS DII,ECTEDTOTHE FACTTHATTHISSURVEY MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
ENLARGED IN SIZE DUE TO REPRODUCTION, THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN
OBTAINING SCALED DATA.
f-
a
w
:;,
<i
~
7. VE!UICAL FEATUI,E ACCURACY:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A) ALL NATUI,AL GROUND ELEVATIONS AND/OR CONTOURS SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN
MEASURED TO AN ESTIMATED VERTICAL POSlTlONAL ACCURACY OF 0.10':t.
LOT'S 3 & 4, BLOCK A, BARBOUR-MORROW SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 45, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF plNELLAS COUNTY, rLORIDA.
:!j Il) CONCRETE, ASPHALT, I'LASTlC, WOOD & METAL ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON HA VE BEEN
.;,: MEASURED TO AN ESTIMATED VERTICAL POSITIONAL ACCURACY OF 0,02':t,
00
o
o
N
"-
00
"-
...
FLOOD PLAIN:
8. HORIZONTAL rEATURE ACCURACY:
A) PROPERTY CORNERS, BUILDING CORNERS AND ALL PERMANENT CONTl{OL POINTS SHOWN
HEREON HA VE BEEN MEASURED TO AN ESTIMATED HORIZONTAL I'OSITIONAL ACCUI{ACY OF 0.02':t,
PER THE FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY
NUMBER 125096, PANEL 0102 G. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN ZONE "AE", WITH A BASE FLOOD
ELEVATION OF 11,00 FEET, AS REFERENCED TO THE FIRM (FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP) MAP,
PINEL LAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. SEI'rEMBER 3, 2003.
'"
;t
<J
..{
B) ROADWAYS, UTILITIES, TREES AND BODIES OF WATER SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN
MEASURED TO AN ESTIMATED HORIZONTAL POSITIONAL ACCURACY OF 0.10':t.
CERTIFICATIONS:
.>:
m
...
I
....,
ABDELGAWA
o
--'
"'
N
o
00
o
./
'"
;t
"
./
"'
N
o
:0
o
./
c
;t
2
'"
'"
o
~
./
.:..i
9433 Balm Rlvervlew Rd
R,vervlew, Flonda. 33579
Phone: 813.74/,1555
Fax: 813,741,1553
LB # 7243
11115 SURVEY 15 NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED
SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.
A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF LOT'S 3 & 4, BLOCK A, BARBOUR-MORROW SUBDIVISION - PINELLAS COUNTY
JOHN W. STRACHAN, P.5.M.
FLORIDA SURVEYORS REGISTRATION NO. 63' 2
JOB NUMBER
08025
REVISIONS
SECTION
8
TOWNSHIP
29S
RANGE
15 E
SCALE
1"= 20'
FIELD DATE
04/07/08
DRAWN BY
(~ .o~
'~Q
, GI\Af'0\
FILE NAME
08025 LOT 3-4 BLK A
SHEET
1 OF 1
SITE DATA EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
ZONING: T T
LAND USE (CG): RETAIL RESTAURANT
LOT AREA: 5,400 SF (0.12 AC) 5,000 - 10,000 SF 5,400 SF (0.12 Ac)
LOT WIDTH: 50' MIN. 100' 50'
LOT DEPTH: 108' 108'
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 2,584 Sf 4,385 Sf.
(FAR.) 47.8 % 105% 81.2 %
(FRONT) 0' 0' - 15' 0'
SETBACKS (ft.) (SIDES) N/S 0.4' / 5.5' 0' 10' 0.8' / 5.47'
FlEX DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD TABLE 2.803 (REAR) 46.67' 10' - 20' VARIES: 2.25' - 5.0t
BUILDING HEIGHT (ft.) 16'-0" 25' - 100' 16'-0"
PAVED V.U.A. (sf.) 0 0
SIDEWALK AREA (sf.) 453 Sf 4,50 Sf.
IMPERVIOUS AREA (RATIO) (sf.) 3,079 Sf (57%) 95 % 4,862 Sf. ( 90 % )
PERVIOUS AREA (sf.) 2,321 Sf (43%) 538 Sf. ( 10 % )
INTERIOR LANDSCAPING (% OF PAVED V.U.A.) 0 0 0
PARKING SPACES 0 7 - 15 SPACES / 1000 0
31 - 66
~~
. -
C"i-
lr)lr)
, '0
0. '
~o.
~
BLOCK CORNER
FD N&D
LB #5776
EXISTING 1 STORY
COMMERCIAL
431 MANDALAY AVENUE
'"
....
M
...
S90000'00"E
S89056'30"E
1 08.20' (P)
108.58' (M)
BENCH
i 2 STORY
:~::/ '. COMMERCIAL
;/ ./;J.%3rA// //
: // ////;;/;~:%';/h3r3r.%/;;>///./////./ '. . SLOG. '" SlDG
'STAIRS /;, ///;/~/// /:2///// // 0 4S' N "': 0 16' N
! COVERED UTILlT/E;' '/>/; /W/ //~// }/;;CW';::,;;;,.{,;;;,.{.%#/3r;;::;3r #3r;:P;/;:t/;:,//:: ./
FDW'IP
NO II?;, elF &
- O~55cK-----_m__--_--___m-
O.SO'W.
LOT 2
LOT 42
UJ
=:>
Z
UJ
>
<:(
>-
<:(
-J
<:(
o
z
<:(
~
8
BENCH
39.3'
UJ
;:::- ;Z
<(I-::i
--';ZO<
CLUJlLi
/.<z
OlLilLi
o<>u
~~o2
LUI-J--.::>
--'--'00
=> <('I" co
OX/x
coCL ......
)-C/)CO=>
<(<(!SO
--,lLiUC/)
<(9)-
O~lLi
;Z _ --'
<('0--'
.<'1"<(
~ >
N
TRASH CAN
~i PLANTE
O'
q 8 METAL BOX
ii50
lr)
o
co
O.
O~
O'
lr)~
NEW 1 STORY ADDITION
1,187 SO. FT.
o
;Z
=>
o
co
X
......
0<
o
;Z
z
"
o
UJ
::;
MWM
MWM
!flu;
0=
OC"i
- lr)
;)0.-
o 0
'00
0'0
Z~
LOT 41
RAISED
CONCRETE
<..l
Z
0'
<..l
...
~
oW
.z
1 STORY
COMMERCIAL
KEY
TREES
*
COVERED PATIO
518 SO. FT.
i
;
i
i
j
i
;
i
;
j
c+
i
;
i
i
i
i
o
SHRUBS
FD N&D )
"m"~
LOT 40
......\1/
//\'
CD ~~~l~=~~,ED SITE PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CARROT WOOD TREES I
TO BE REMOVED ~B" I
8" I
I
I
I
d
I
,,,
o ~::E:~,I'~~o,_~ANDSCAPING
630 Chestnut Street
Clearwater, FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774
Fax: (727) 791-6942
MuniCipality:
Clearwater
Land Use:
EX. LANDSCAPING LEGEND
EXISTING / REMOVED = TOTAL COMMON NAME
17 / 0 = 17
WASHINGTONIANS
2/2=0
CARROT WOOD
28 / 0 = 28
INDIAN HAWTHORN
8/8=0
OLEANDER
N
W.E
S
Address:
431 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
PorcellO No.
Issue Date:
12/19/2008
Scale:
1" = 20'.0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.
@COPYRIGHT2008
H1S DRAWING IS THE Pr?QPEI1TY O~ DESIGN d. LtC
NDEF! NO CIRCUMSTANCE MAY THIS DRAWING BE REPRODUCED
UBlISHED. ALTERED OF! USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT WRITTEN
UIHORIZATION fROM DESIGN iT. LtC
/.
!
OPENING FOR ROOF
DRAINAGE
/.' STUCCO FI~ISH TO /'
MATCH EX. BUILDING .
. -;;
~
f}
: I
. i ---Yk" J
-y t..-:1 "m.J:-- --
, , ~J;~ i ,,-- -
~''''/I7K'Y1W- -:--
SOUTH Et.EV A TION
--~~~~
----(~t)
~~1Y t.1~~
SCALE: 1 /4" = 1 '-0",
~ 1711 r-i t1 wL,l \ L,blr-+ (If
0I-\GRWi 1-4" \f'I \....~\t>~~
rf;>IN~t:J
HvHrbLE Cro~ ' 0V'/~f::::x::::::.>
Address:
431 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
Parcel 10 No.
I Issue Date:
I. 12/31/2008
.IScale:
I! 1/4" = 1'-0"
IIDrawn By:
I ECS
IProject No.
I
- IMuniciPality:
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater
Clearwater, FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774 ,Land Use:
Fax: (727) 791-6942 i
'~COPYRIGHT 2008
HIS OiAWIr-lG IS rNe PtOPEtTY Of DESICiH ,. ll.C
f'tOEIt NO CltC ",,,,,sr ""'CE MA.Y THIS OlA.WING se tE'I!QOuceo
UIll$HEO. ALTEREO Of USE;) IN "'''11' WI'o.l' WITHOU1' wltlTTEN
UIHOIll"'lON FtO,", DESICN iT LtC
~z
~
~.o
-
~.
~.
PROPOSED
ADDITION
m~'
n c#o C~"o
_Ll_ _, . ;,
9+Ym"~
N* 0 (j~
~-~'l"
l..- -tr-
u
~::
-4-,' _
:::~J-"-
Ll
*
PROPOSED
ADDITION
EXISTING
BUILDING
FLOOR PLAN
, 0"
/8" - 1 -
SCALE: 1 -
m m
m 'T m
a
~
-L1-o
C:r
~'
_..J......:l
-~~- ~
_...i',~' '
l__.~_
"
I
~~
Municipality:
Clearwater
Land Use:
Address: Ave
433 Mandalay h FL
Clearwater Beac ,
33767
PorcellO No.
@COPYRIGHT~~ 0 FOE S t~ENpRi~OULC\~.
G " 'HE ~~~:HE,: DRA:;~Gw::"o", W:':'~N
"IS DRA:;'I'R~UMnA~C;EUSED IN AND' E S I G N "
NOEl( NO AlTERED N FRO M
U all SHE D. 1 A T I 0
U THO R I
Issue Date:
1/12/2009
Scale:
1/8" = 1'-0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.
D
D
PROPOSED
ADDITION
EXISTING .
SLOPE
EXISilNG
SLOPE
ROOF PLAN
PROPOSED
ADDITION
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1 '-0"
! .
Address:
433 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
ParcellD No.
630 Chestnut Street
Clearwater, FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774
Fax: (727) 791-6942
Municipality:
Clearwater
Land Use:
@ COPYRIGHT 2008
HIS ORAWING IS THE PROPERTY Of DESIGN iT. llC
NOEll: NO CIRCUMSTANCE MAY 'THIS DRAWING BE RE?RODUCED.
UBLISHED. ALTERED OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT Wi!:lTTEN
UTHORIZATION FROM DESiGN iT lLC
Issue Date:
1 / 1 212009
Scale:
1/8":: 1'-0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.
......p' ,.... .?1~ ~J~
r
, ~OPENING FOR ROOF
:i I J DRAINAGE ~
-- - J~--
erq trrT H t1 . --- :
~o;f~!z: I ~ .
\
\)
\~
~)
:
,. . I
~;4I~flr~ ?6..' ..==~ (~f
i';u11-1;:>I/-it'L~ ... i
I
I
SOUTH ~EVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1 '-0",
~ ~. ~ a~--~ ~"!r2l7~1JeP
lV .~ Op..t.>-('mu-----.-~
---r
f. STUCCO FINISH TO' '.
MATCH EX. BUILDING .
"'. .'
. BAMBOO TRIM TO
I0ATCH EX. BUILDING'
0-1(,4 ct
-u ~r~ ..l<z:t~~
. . . Pt:::v~ '. . '
'.
'Wt'" ~r-l=~=' ~
. rt)<~~-'-
, .
.'
Municipality:
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater
Clearwater, FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774 Land Use:
Fax: (727) 791-6942
I
!
1
,.."
IpH'
_JJ.~f?~z>~MT
,1',,, ,.1:~L'l-::>/:',
;HT"i-.r/",IYVG
Illmn' ,
ill.'~":~"~-co.
,) . .'. ... I"'I~
JilL ,. I 1m" ...~---
HIt. . ..... .' - .--'
"'8'" tj
",,'. m , .aA
l.lj.~i.I'
1 i. ,
~ (}J~I
17, g c- ~ f7rer1~1'Y 1..1f"1'?
,=--tk~c1~~J. '::
.- ~V\ "
I
i
I
r
I
I
Address:
431 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
ParcellD No.
i
I
III.'
Ii II !
::1' 'I>
"1'" "
I-Ii!!!.,
InTi'
"i ',,'
i';
ill!'
!In
Issue Date:
12/31/2008
Scale:
1/4" = 1'-0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.
@ COPYRIGHT 2068
HIS DRAWING IS ,HE PROPERTY OF,DESIGN iT. LtC.
N-DEIl: NO CIRCUMSTANCE M,AY THIS DRAWING SE REPRODUCEO
USLISHED. AlTERED,OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT WRfTtE.~
UtHO~IZ^tION fROM DESIGN iT, llC.
,A
~
Hi
..!-,--J<:>,.;iP'!" t-L:K~~'-~I -
-M-+=l--'L'~<o-Jl,7 <? I ,
(
\)
, l
! :::e I
I' \P '
- I~ ~
I!; i
-t
I~
I~'
::::
M----"J1=ttez?~---qFl1r?-~--,\lV Lkk~-11j2t-~~- ~ I \e'~
'(Y l"\1--1 t"'lfoa I FIeo\-t tH~- ~t1-t, ~~ ttt;CJ 1 ~THf; \N~
! I_I
,.~.'~d4~~-~QBJJ2f?_.tJ~4~:~Ltrtb \11 T
11 if ,)(d"-' r::::., V;...:.Jfkl 1bJr- 07.;7 'l/?-,--------r I I I
'" I, i f"'il.Q ~~nV'V- v \qv' -Vi-.,:---i-----!! ! I
Ii 1\ ! i ! i I
Ii : ; ii,
,
Ii
f 'S'TUCCO FINISH TO J '
, , MA~CH EX. BUILDING '
ELECTRICAL
SERVICE
t'I'I~
r -VrJlttn~ 4:fi.
LJ~.t'~1"'IM . ,
, ~ ~~4"b-~-v" I 1:7"
i l _ t~H~ WH~~H~ ~~~t
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
* 1:2~o~ H-oVH~Q__=--~~bNh:;~ G61v\P~*IT
--* -"'tHJ0eL.~ArLt2H ,., J~---8i::'It-'<101 ~ IW~--
m . rt2~2'Brd0r ~t:>j~z:.eHt~UI~tt'40fou-W~
~~~-r ~ HOKfH. 'm_
.'illl -1J -ut','
"-
"-
"-
"-
"-
"-
(0 /
/
/
/
/
/
WALK-IN COOLER
" ,~ . ,<-
~1l \ It; )~
~~lh+.1Ker: ._:
,,\ {;;1;? Vi, -P?t1ali"'l ~
WALK-IN FREEZER
...._~+~-~~
Municipality:
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater
Clearwater. FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774 Land Use:
Fax: (727) 791-6942
~
1
{'
-::;
+-
Address:
431 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
Parcel 10 No.
@COPYRIGHT2cxi8
HIS DRAWING IS THE PROJ>ERTY OF OeSIGN iT. LLC.
NOER NO CIRCUMSTANCE M.AY THIS DRAWING BE REPRODUCED.
UBLISHED. ALTERED OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT WRITTEN
UTHOR:IZAT10N FROM DESIGN iT. lLC.
Issue Date:
12/31/2008
Scale:
1/4" = 1'-0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.
,j
-I
~1 )to!-{ e~d~-p~~ 0
u ~1qocl61~------
}??Ul U2~~Z1
~7f~I~1
II
I I
II
WALK-IN FREEZER
\
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1 /4" = 1 '-0"
~ jrilf; '~'-0-11t:::H 10
l'<-P:J J>t.c; to rq T t&4 /~,
I?I~ z;/'~,
I
o t;?~r-~
IZ @i21~Y ~?1N0
hlf;:l5Lh\yJ )
"
"'"'7. ~ '1 f_ a... (I
~f' .",
. .
I
i
Municipality:
630 Chestnut Street Clearwater
Clearwater. FL 33756
Tel: (727) 796-8774 Land Use:
Fax: (727) 791-6942
I
~
I
~
~
-1
l
.:..0.
~
\S
(\
'"
J
r ~~~4-
----
-E)
\
\J
/'
Address:
431 Mandalay Ave
Clearwater Beach, FL
33767
ParcellD No.
@COPYRIGHT2OO8
HtS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF DESIGN iT. lLC
NO!:R NO CIRCUMSTANCE MAY THIS DRAWING BE REPRODUCED.
UBLISHED. ALTERED OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT WRITTEN
UTHORIIATION FROM DESIGN iT, llC
Issue Date:
1 2/31 /2008
, Scale:
1/4"= 1'-0"
Drawn By:
ECS
Project No.