FLD2009-02005 - 490 Mandalay Ave - Havana Exclusive Cigars - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005
490 MANDALAY AVE 8&9
HAVANA EXCLUSIVE CIGARS
PLANNER OF RECORD: R -T
ATLAS # 267A
ZONING: T
LAND USE: RFH
RECEIVED: 02/03/2009
INCOMPLETE:
COMPLETE:
MAPS:
PHOTOS:
STAFF REPORT:
DRC :
CDB:
CLW CoverSheet
CDB Meeting Date: April 21, 2009
Case Number: FLD2009-02005
Agenda Item: D. 1.
Owner: Ma G. Really, Inc.
Applicant: Lisset H. Diego
Address: 490 Mandalay Avenue Suites 8 & 9
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from retail
sales and services to nightclub within the Tourist (T) District within an
existing 6,254 square foot shopping center with 26 off-street parking
spaces and no changes to the building or structure setbacks, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 2-803.C.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District
CURRENT FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High (RFH)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Retail Sales and Services
Proposed Use: Retail Sales and Services / Nightclub
EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District
SURROUNDING South: Tourist (T) District
ZONING AND USES:
East: Tourist (T) District
West: Tourist (T) District
Overnight Accommodations
Attached Dwellings; and
Retail Sales and Services
Retail Sales and Services; and
Restaurants
Attached Dwellings
UPDATE:
At its meeting of March 17, 2009, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this item to its
meeting of April 21, 2009, as there appeared to be an issue with surrounding property owners not
receiving proper notice. Subsequent to this meeting, staff was able to review the notices that were sent
out and confirmed that the individual to whom notice appeared not to have been given was actually given
notice at a different address from that which is within 500 feet of the subject property, and that proper
notice was given to all surrounding property owners.
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.40-acre subject property is located at the southwest corner of Mandalay Avenue and Baymont
Street, which is within the "Destination Resort" District of Beach by Design. The site is currently
developed with a 6,254 square foot shopping center that is divided into five tenant spaces, as well as a
26-space off-street parking area. It is noted that both the building and the off-street parking area are
nonconforming with regard to the minimum required setbacks; however the site does currently meet all
other development standards.
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 -Page I
Development Proposal:
On February 2, 2009, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application was submitted for the
subject property. The application proposes to establish a nightclub use within an existing 720 square foot
tenant space where there is presently a retail sales and services use. It should be noted that while the
proposed use is technically described as a nightclub, the actual function of the proposed use would be
more consistent with that of a cigar bar.
The existing shopping center building and off-street parking area will remain unchanged. Therefore, as
there will be no building additions or modifications to these existing site improvements, there will be no
impact upon the F.A.R., I.S.R., minimum lot area/size, maximum building height, and minimum setback
development standards. The development proposal's compliance with those remaining applicable
development standards of the Community Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Minimum Off-Street Parkin : The existing shopping center has a total of 26 off-street parking spaces and
is comprised of two restaurants, two retail sales and services uses, and one office. The following table
depicts these existing uses, the standard off-street parking requirements, and the proposed use with a
revised total off-street parking requirement.
Required Off-Street
Tenant Space Use Square Footage Parkin
Clear Sky Beachside Cafe 1-6 Restaurant 3,362.34 50.43
Gelato Bello 7 Restaurant 745 11.17
Retail Sales 733.33 3.66
Havana Exclusive Cigars 8 and 9 Nightclub 733.33 7:33'
Key West Express 10 and 11 Retail Sales 973.33 4.86
Realty Resources 12 Office 440 1.76
EXISTING TOTAL: 71.88 (72)
PROPOSED TOTAL: 75-55(76)
As per the above, the shopping center as a whole is presently nonconforming with respect to the
provision of off-street parking. Based upon the standard off-street parking rates, a total of 76 spaces are
needed for those uses currently established on-site - 50 more than presently exist. As nightclubs are
required to provide 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area (retail sales and services uses are
only required 511,000), the proposed change of use for the 733 square foot tenant space would increase
this nonconformity by an additional four (4) spaces.
It is noted, however, that pursuant to CDC Section 3-1405, when any land, building or area is used for
two or more uses that are listed in the shared parking table, the minimum number of required parking
spaces shall be determined by multiplying the individual minimum parking requirements by the
appropriate percentages listed in the table. The following table depicts the off-street parking requirement
for the proposal as per the above:
WEEKDAY WEEKEND
Use: Midnight 9 A.M. 6 P.M. 9 A.M. 6 P.M.
6 A.M. 4 P.M. Midnight 4 P.M. Midnight
Office (1.76) 5%=0.088 100%=1.76 10%=0.176 10%=0.176 5%=0.088
Retail (4.86) 5% = 0.243 70% = 3.402 90% = 4.374 100% = 4.86 70% = 3.402
Restaurant (61.6) 10% = 6.16 50% = 30.8 100% = 61.6 50% = 30.8 100% = 61.6
Restaurant (7.33) 10% = 0.733 50% = 3.665 100% = 7.33 50% = 3.665 100% = 7.33
Totals: 7.224 39.627 73.48 39.501 72.42
The shared parking table does not specifically identify a category for the nightclub use. As such, the restaurant category is used far
nightclubs due to their similar hours of operation impacts on off-street parking.
Cotmunity Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 2
Based upon the above table, the subject property would require a minimum of 73 off-street parking
spaces with the proposed change of use to establish the nightclub. However, as it was previously noted,
only 26 off-street parking spaces presently exist on the subject property and no additional off-street
parking is proposed as part of this application and the addition of any further off-street parking would not
be possible given the existing on-site improvements.
As such, it is requested that the additional off-street parking requirements for the proposed nightclub be
waived. It should be noted that the proposed nightclub is not intended to be a nightclub in the traditional
sense, but instead more of a cigar bar. As such, the demand for off-street parking should not be as
intense as it would be for a traditional nightclub and will not likely result in an intensification from the
existing retail sales and services use.
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-803, the uses allowed
within the Tourist (T) District are subject to the standards and criteria set forth in this Section. Among
those criteria established for the review of Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects is the
following:
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.
As previously noted, the proposal does not contain any changes to either the existing shopping center
building or the off-street parking area, and while the proposal will meet some of the above criteria, it
cannot meet others without being required to modify the existing architectural elevations of the shopping
center. However, to require such changes simply to. accommodate a proposed change of use for an
existing tenant space would be impractical and inappropriate.
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 3
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and criteria
as per CDC Sections 2-801.1 and 2-803:
Standard Existing / Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
F.A.R. 1.0 0.62 X'
I.S.R. 0.95 0.90 X'
Minimum Lot Area 5,000 - 10,000 square feet 17,457 square feet X'
Minimum Lot Width 50 - 100 feet Mandalay Avenue: 180 feet X'
Baymont Street: 100 feet
Maximum Building Height 25 - 50 feet 12 feet X1
Minimum Setbacks Front: 15 feet North: 14.9 feet (to building) X'
Zero feet (to pavement)
East: 51.7 feet (to building) X1
Zero feet (to pavement)
Side: 10 feet South: 4.2 feet (to building) X1
4.2 feet (to pavement)
Rear: 20 feet West: 3.1 feet (to building) X'
Zero feet (to pavement)
Minimum Off-Street 73 parking spaces 26 parking spaces XZ
Parkin er shared parking table
Figures reflect existing conditions on site that are not being altered or approved by the proposed application.
See above discussion with regard to Minimum Off-Street Parking.
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 4
CDMPLLANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the flexibility criteria as
per CDC Section 2-803.C (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 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;
Q Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape
design and anorooriate distances between buildings.
1 See above discussion with regard to Comprehensive Inftll Redevelopment Project Criteria.
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 5
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 March 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. That the 0.4 acre subject property is located at the southwest corner of Mandalay Avenue and
Baymont Street;
2. That the subject property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High
(RFH) Future Land Use Plan category;
3. That the subject property is located within the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as
part of the "Destination Resort" district;
4. That the subject property is presently nonconforming with respect to the provision of an adequate
number of off-street parking spaces;
5. That the subject property is presently nonconforming with respect to the existing shopping center
building and off-street parking area not meeting the minimum required setbacks;
6. That the proposal consists only of a change of use from retail sales and services to nightclub within
an existing shopping center building;
7. That the proposal has no impact upon the following development standards: F.A.R., I.S.R., minimum
lot area/size and maximum building height, as they presently exist;
8. That the proposed will not exacerbate the existing nonconforming setbacks for the shopping center
building or the off-street parking area; and
9. That the subject property is developed with a total of 26 off-street parking spaces, which does not
meet the minimum off-street parking requirement for the property as currently occupied, and with the
proposed change of use this nonconformity would be increased.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the
following conclusions of law:
1. That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the applicable Standards and
Criteria as per CDC Sections 2-801.1 and 2-803;
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 -- Page 6
That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the Flexibility criteria for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as per CDC Section 2-803.C; and
That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the General Standards for
Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913.A.
Based upon the above and subject to the attached conditions, the Planning Department recommends
APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from retail sales and
services to nightclub within the Tourist (T) District within an existing 6,254 square foot shopping center
with 26 off-street parking spaces and no changes to the building or structure setbacks, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 2-803.C, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, any outstanding comments of the Fire Department
shall be addressed;
2. That this use (cigar bar) be limited to this tenant space only, and that any desired relocation within
this shopping center or enlargement of floor area shall require a new application for re-review by the
CDB;
3. That on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages be limited to beer and wine (2-COP) and there
be no package sales in sealed containers of liquor;
4. That there shall be no enticing alcoholic drink specials, such as, but not limited to, ladies night, sink
or swim, or quarter beer night;
5. That there be no music played loud enough to impede low decibel conversation; and
6. That there shall be no amplified music or microphone usage.
Prepared by Planning Department Staff:
Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs of Site and Vicinity
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD) (Pending casesl Up for the next CDBIMandalay 0490 Havana Cigars (T) 2009.04 - Pending -
RT1StaffReport 2009 04-21.doc
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 7
Robert G. Tefft
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
(727) 562-4539
robert.tefft m clearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
? Development Review Manager
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida August 2008 to Present
Manage and supervise five planners and two land resource specialists. Represent the department at
Community Development Board and City Council meetings, and the City at meetings of Pinellas
Planning Council and Countywide Planning Authority as well as other public bodies as needed.
? Planner III
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida June 2005 to August 2008
Performed technical reviews and prepared of staff reports for various land development applications.
Organized data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports. Made
presentations to various City Boards and Committees.
? Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida May 2005 to June 2005
Performed technical reviews and prepared of staff reports for various land development applications.
Organized data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports.
? Assistant Planner I Planner Senior Planner
City of Delray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida October 1999 to May 2005
Performed technical reviews and prepared staff reports for land development applications such as,
but not limited to: site plans, conditional uses, rezonings, land use amendments, and text
amendments. Performed reviews of building permit applications. Organized data and its display in
order to track information and provide status reports. Made presentations to various City Boards.
Provided in-depth training to the Assistant Planner position with respect to essential job functions
and continuous guidance. Provided information on land use applications, ordinances, land
development regulations, codes, and related planning programs/services to other professionals and
the public.
EDUCATION
? Bachelor of Arts, Geography (Urban Studies), University of South Florida, 1999
LICENSES & CERTIFICATES
? American Planning Association
Community Development Board - April 21, 2009
FLD2009-02005 - Page 8